To mark the Charity Awards 2025 opening for entries, judging panel chair Chris Sherwood sat down with the Civil Society Podcast for a chat about all things Charity Awards.
In this episode, the RSPCA boss discusses what he and his fellow judges are looking for, what made some of the recent winners stand out and what charities should highlight when entering.
The Charity Awards 2025 are free to enter. For more information, click here.
You can listen to the interview now below or on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, and Pocket Casts, where you can find our other podcast episodes, including interviews with last year’s winners.
AI-generated transcript
Rob Preston:
Hello and welcome to another episode of the Civil Society Podcast. We have a snazzy new logo and an exciting new guest for you this week. I'm Civil Society news editor Rob Preston, and on today's show, I'll be speaking to Charity Awards judging panel chair, Chris Sherwood. Many of you will know Chris from his work at the RSPCA and various other charities, but in this episode, we will discuss his experiences as part of the panel of sector experts who, each year, decide which charity should receive a coveted Charity Award. Applications are now open for the 2025 Charity Awards brought to you by Civil Society Media and overall awards partner, CCLA. If you are thinking about entering your charity, Chris and I will chat about what the judges are looking for, what made some of the recent winners stand out and what charities don't need to worry about when entering. Most importantly, the awards are free to enter until the deadline of Wednesday 26 February. 2025 shortlisted charities are invited to attend the presentation ceremony in London in July next year as our guests. More information can be found at charityawards.co.uk. I hope you find this conversation with Chris interesting and useful, and I'll speak to you again at the end.
Hi Chris, thanks for joining us on this Civil Society Podcast. It's great to have you here. So, Chris Sherwood is the chief executive of the RSPCA, where he's been since 2018 and he's soon to be joining the NSPCC as their chief exec. How are things going? Chris, are things winding down at the RSPCA now, as you come to the end of the 200th year celebrations, and have you been able to do much in terms of preparing for your new role at NSPCC?
Chris Sherwood:
Hi Rob. It's great to be on your podcast. Thanks for having me today. And yeah, it's, I mean, that kind of transition period, really. I did, we're talking on a sort of Thursday, and I did my first external event for NSPCC last night, which was, which was fantastic. It was a kind of fundraising event, but I'm still, you know, full hands on the on the steering wheel of the RSPCA until Christmas, and I've got a bit of time off between this role and the new role. I'm going trekking around Latin America. So, yeah, I'll be back in in the UK, ready to start on the 20th of January. And I can't wait. It's an incredible organisation. I still can't quite believe I'm going to be the next chief executive of the NSPCC? Fantastic.
RP:
Yeah, and it sounds like you've got a well earned break book there before you've taken another high profile charity role and but you've been in the sector for quite a while now, so you've had previous positions at many other charities, including disability charities, like Scope and Shaw Trust, innovation charity Nesta and relationship to charity Relate, which was your first CEO role, and you also held trustee positions, including at the sense braging better and NCVO, the umbrella body. So, do you feel like your experience over the years in the sector. Do you think that's given you a good overview of how different charities work, and has it put you in good stead to be a Charity Awards judge?
CS:
I'll let other people judge that one, Rob, but I've certainly been kicking around the sector for over 20 years now, which you know, I have to remind myself, I think I joined my first charity right back in the early 2000s actually. But you know, I've had the real privilege of working in the disability sector, the children and family sector, the animal sector, so I do think it's given me a good window into how the sector works. And I've also had the privilege of working in tiny charities. I work for a start up social enterprise called Disable go, where it was literally five of us, and I've been a trustee of a small disabled people's organization, and I've also worked in some of our largest charities, like the RSPCA and Scope. And I've also worked in different structures. So I've been chief executive of two federated charities. We've got a federation of 140 branches RSPCA, Relate was a federated charity, and I've also worked in Unitary structures, so yeah, I think that gives me, hopefully, a perspective to be a judge, and being a judge of the Charity Awards has just been such an incredible honor. And I know on your podcast, and I'm supposed to say this, but I really do think it's brilliant, and I absolutely love the opportunity to have a window into what our incredible sector is doing every year, and it's both exciting but also incredibly humbling, because you see some of the really difficult work and how we're providing that lifeline to so many vulnerable people in our society. So it's an incredible privilege and honor, and I really enjoy it.
RP:
Excellent. Yeah, that's That's great to hear from your perspective, how did you first get involved with being a Charity Awards judge?
CS:
And so I think I've got to know, you know, the team at Civil Society through the conference circuit, and you know, you guys at Civil Society asked me to speak at a couple of conferences, and then I was approached to be a judge. And I remember the first time I came to a meet and greet of the judges that I was incredibly nervous. Yes, because, you know, you had amazing people in the sector, like Lynne Berry, Richard Hawks, sat around the table, and I was a bit like, why did you ask me? I think I was in just not long been chief executive of the RSPCA. But look, what I really like about being a judge is what an incredible team of judges that we have, and we don't always agree with each other, but we disagree agreeably. And to use the kind of the phrase of the of the year, and and it's just the incredible richness of different perspectives different parts of the sector that come together. And I think that's what makes the Charity Awards unique, because it does talk to all parts of the sector, whether you work in the heritage and culture sector, whether you work in where I work currently, animal welfare, whether you work in social care, disability, it talks to all parts of the sector, and it also talks to small, medium and large charities as well. So yeah, and the judges bring that perspective into the room as well. So yeah, it's an incredible privilege to be part of that team, because it is a team, actually.
RP:
Yeah, absolutely. And so. So you first joined us in 2021 was the first year of the awards that you you were a judge, and that was the year after we'd taken a year off, I think, for because of the Covid pandemic in 2020 so it's perhaps a slightly unusual first year to be to be judging. What I wanted to get an understanding of is and is, of how the process works. I suppose, when you're on that panel, and I mean, you get how many applications come in, what stage do you on the as one of the judges start looking at them, and how long does that process take?
CS:
That's a great question, Rob, and you know, it's important to say what a comprehensive process, the judging process is, and how we take every application really seriously. So, and there are kind of three stages the judging process. So last year, we had, I think from memory, around 250 applications. There's an initial shift of those applications, and that's just to check that they're in the right category, because we have our different sectoral categories and initial readout on those applications. Then, because I was deputy chair, working with the incredible Sue Sayer, who was my predecessor as chair for two years, and now as chair, we then take the second shift of those applications and we boil them down to a kind of smaller number per category of around five, six or seven for the judges to be able to review. And we do that second screen, and we're really reliant on what comes out the sector. You know, I've seen, now, I've been a judge for four years, that, you know, some sectors have more applications per year, and you start to see some of the trends. We saw quite a lot of rehabilitation, and probation type applications. This year, we've seen kind of a number of mental health applications in previous years, domestic violence and abuse service applications. You see those themes come through really so we go through that second shift, and then we get to the really heart of the judging process, which is where the judges are allocated categories based on their skills, experience, their knowledge. And some will pick up two or three different categories, and then they will review the the, you know, half a dozen applications in those categories, and look for who their overall category winner is going to be, and and that's a great part of the process. So every application is really being read at least three times, actually. So we take the process really seriously, and then you get into those, you know, robust conversations on on the categories, and those are incredible to watch, really. And what I love about this process is the just the depth of knowledge in our judges when looking at these applications. So, yeah, it's an incredible process. And as I said, for me, I do spend a weekend kind of reading something like 170 applications, I lock myself away with Marmalade my cat, and off we go, lots of tea, lots of biscuits. And, you know, you get to the end of it, but it is. It's a bit overwhelming, actually, because you just see the incredible richness of what we do as a sector in our various different guises. And that's an incredible honor to have that privileged window into that
RP:
Is Marmalade helpful at all in the judging process that they have any opinions that they offer?
CS:
Oh, I think he quite likes actually. Because, if I'm honest with you, I normally sit there with my laptop in bed, and he quite likes that because it's nice and warm. So I think he quite enjoys the weekend really. I'm not sure any strategic advice is forthcoming, other than more, you know, dreamies for him, really Rob, but, but, yeah, it's definitely because you have to really get that time to focus in and read those applications. And I, I take it really seriously. People have put together that application, and, you know, they're showing the best their work as well. And you want to give them the respect by actually making sure you actually read it from cover to cover.
RP:
That was really interesting what you said about the different types of charities that apply each year, so you get kind of a sense for what's going on in the sector, and I guess perhaps where the greatest need has been, or where a lot of projects have been taking place. And yeah, talks about mental health and and. Yeah, and employment charities and things like that. So, yeah, so it gives you a bit of a perspective into what's going on in the wider sector, I suppose.
CS:
It really does. And what I think Civil Society, you guys, Civil Society, do so well, is being able to tell that story. And because, you know, this is what the sector wants to showcase through its work, and come forward with their applications, and then playing that story back to us as well about what it's like to be in our sector at the moment, and the incredible work that we're doing as well, but also the real challenges that we're facing and and that's what's great about the coverage that you then produce. And you know, anyone who's thinking of applying, I would really encourage them to do so, because what we've seen through, you know, the four years I've been as a judge and talking to judges who've been there for a longer time, is that ability to be able to put a spotlight onto your issue, onto your project, onto your campaign, or onto your work as well, and being able to show that, and you know back to the sector as well. And certainly, I've seen that with our overall winners before as well, about how it's got some energy behind their campaign as well. So it is an opportunity not just to celebrate your work, but actually to put a spotlight on it and to ensure that that's getting communicated out to a broader audience as well. So it's a that's the great thing about the fact that Civil Society is not only putting on these awards, but you're actually producing quite a lot of content afterwards, and carrying on doing that through the year to bring a spotlight to the various issues or projects or campaigns or charities that have applied.
RP:
I know our events team is busy all year round with the awards, so yeah, can certainly agree with that you mentioned about. So you became chair of the awards panel in 2023 so, so you were a judge for two years, and before becoming chair, and you spoke a bit about some of the extra responsibilities you've had doing that, and you also mentioned robust conversations between members of the judging panel. Are you able to speak any more about that and your role as chair? Do you have to sort of moderate some of these conversations, and then perhaps, do you have to make an overall decision when there's people with opposing views about certain applications.
CS:
Well, I mean, you're one of a team. It is a little bit daunting being the chairman. I've only been a chair for the last set of judging round, because you've got incredible figures from across the sector around the table, but the thing for me is just trying to find my consensus, so letting the debate play out around the judging table, and, you know, ensuring that it's an inclusive process so different perspectives are heard and not one voice dominates the conversation. But I'm pleased to say, you know, I stepped in for Sue when, you know, in 2022 as the chair of the judging panel that year, and I obviously judge this year, we managed to avoid getting to a vote and getting to consensus around the table and but you know, the the great thing about being the chair of the judging panel is the incredible passion in the room for the various charities that have applied, and they're great projects. The challenging thing as the chair of the panel is the incredible passion in the room, you know. And it's, you know, it's finding those ways of actually finding that consensus. And I think, you know, the thing that I know that Civil Society, you guys think a lot about, is about what the story is for this year as well, and ensuring that we've got that portfolio of projects coming forward that win the awards, that tell the story of what it's like in our sector this year as well. And, you know, ensure that we've got, you know, big, small, medium charities and a really good regional balance as well across the four nations of the UK, because this is a set of awards that do cross all four nations of the UK as well. So that's really important for us as well.
RP:
Yeah, yeah, that's a really important and so with these awards, for anyone listening you might not be aware. So there's, there's several different categories that that you can apply to, and then each category has a winner. And then on the night, there's an overall awards winner that's that's selected as well, who's wins the Outstanding Achievement Award. So for what we're going to do now, we're just going to talk through some of the overall award winners that have that have won the prize in the last four years. So since you've been judge, Chris, so if you could cast your mind back to 2021, so we had SeeAbility that year, which was a children's sight loss charity based in Surrey, and they won the award for their work to persuade the NHS to carry out eye tests for children with learning difficulties at all special schools across England. So it was quite a big project. Can you remember the process of that and what made sea ability stand out that year?
CS:
Yeah, it was a this was a tricky one, because we were interviewing on screen and we were judging on screen because of the pandemic, but I think that the thing we really liked about SeeAbility was it told a really clear story about unmet health care needs, and was a really brilliant example of. Transforming outcomes for a largely unnoticed group of beneficiaries. And they were really looking at how to leverage the NHS, you know, what's a really complex area of public policy. So, and we were really impressed with the incredible team at SeaAbility back in 2021 as well, who told a really compelling story. So, and the other thing that I would definitely say when you're applying is and what they did really well in their application was evidence of impact. And, you know, not just telling what they did, but what difference that it made as well. And they also were telling us their story about how they were sustaining this work, you know, beyond, beyond the life of the actual individual project itself as well. So, so that was, that was really good to see. But, you know, I think having read hundreds, if not, getting on towards 1000 applications now, over the past four years, is really clearly articulating what you've done, the difference you've made, why you've done it. You know, that story is really important when pulling together your submission for the Charity Awards as well, so we can see what the problem you were trying to solve, what you did, the impact that it had, and how you're sustaining it is really key. Yeah, absolutely.
RP:
And then so in 2022 we had Tommy's, which is the baby charity headquartered in London, and they won the award for their Miscarriage Matters campaign, which convinced the ministers to scrap a health policy that required women to have three miscarriages in a row before they could access basic treatment or support. Yes, so can you remember the judging process that year? What made Tommy's campaign stand out?
CS:
And I do absolutely remember that. And I, you know, that was one year where, when I read that application, I thought, Oh, this is the overall winner this year. I mean, you know. And there was some key reasons why. Actually, I think what was really good about Tommy's application that year was that they had a really clear understanding of the problem they were trying to solve. I mean, it is absolutely awful that women had to miscarry three times before they could get access to basic support. You know, whether that was counseling and well being support, you know, that is just shocking. And I think all the judges were shocked by that, and the fact that that there, that they really had undertaken lots of service user representations. They talked to lots of parents who'd experienced miscarriage. They had that real user insight coming forward as well, and and they had a really clear narrative about how they were trying to persuade government to change its position, and they managed to get a back bench lab. MP, Olivia Blake, the labor MP, for Sheffield Hallam, engaged in the campaign as well. So they had, you know, this was an incredible this is the sector doing what it does really well, identifying a really poorly met area of need, pulling together that evidence base, ensuring the voice of people who were affected by this issue came to the fore and building a campaign around it. But the thing that made them the overall winner that year, and I'm really passionate about this, this is incredible. I mean, honestly, when, when we met them, it was incredibly moving, what they had done and but the thing for them, this was a new thing for Tommy's becoming a campaigning charity. So this was actually about them taking a step into being a campaigning charity. So there was some nerves and trepidation on their side, and they talked openly about that, about how this was a new way of working. So and actually winning the overall winner and winning their category was almost a kind of symbol of that's really where Tommy should be as an organization as well. So that was an incredibly inspiring application and a really, really good overall winner. We were really pleased to see that in that year.
RP:
Excellent. Yeah, oh, brilliant. And, yeah, there was another in so in 2023 there was another campaign that won the overall award. I remember I was, I was in the room that year, and I remember the response in the room was, yeah. It was really, really supportive. Everyone seemed to to be very enthusiastic about Freedom From Torture's campaign. So they're a refugee charity based, also based in London, and their campaign was to stop the flight campaign, which was in opposition to the government's Rwanda scheme at that time, and they managed to convince four commercial airlines to rule themselves out of the running for government contracts to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda. What do you do? You remember about that year and about what made that campaign stand out.
CS:
Oh, Rob, I mean, you're absolutely right, the feeling in the room, you know, because Freedom From Torture is an incredible organization, but you know, they've had a really difficult ride with the Home Office, who were really, really, very unhappy about their campaign, so we were a little nervous. Of us about what the reaction would be, but actually the room erupted into pause, and there are even standing ovations in the room when freedom from torture won that award as well. And I think it was only really for me, what I was so pleased with freedom from torture winning. That was it showed us as a sector, having the back of an organization who is standing up to some really serious injustice and some really serious injustice around really, you know, starting to pick apart the post war, post World War Two, you know, kind of way of working around refugees and asylum seekers. So their their campaign, was incredible. I'd also say it was actually really tough competition. Back in 2023 we had some really incredible applications. So this was a lot of debate around freedom from torture, because they had some really good competition from other organizations. But the things that really came out for that, again, this really clear articulation of the problem they were trying to solve. And, you know, people who had been, you know, impacted people who have been asylum seekers or refugees, absolutely. But the four of this as well, and that was really clear through that whole campaign, cost effective. You know, the campaign only cost 10,000 pounds, but it was incredibly creative. And you know, I remember reading their application about how they had realized that, you know, football clubs had been, you know, involved in this, and they were targeting football clubs in Barcelona, and I know absolutely nothing about football, but you know the fact that actually, they were finding these really interesting, creative ways, and, you know, was, was really incredible. And then bringing that kind of public pressure on airlines not to work with, you know, to work with government to to do those repatriation flights to or, you know, those flights to Rwanda. What kind of worried me about this, though, was this reminded me this campaign around how we have to continue to campaign, because actually, the legislation that followed, you know, this campaign was actually putting in, and I can't remember the detail, because I don't work in that part of the sector, but there was actually putting in their requirements for for airlines to take these flights as well. And so it reminded me that this campaign had this incredible success, but you have to dust yourself off and come back to advocate on behalf of your your beneficiaries or your cause as well. Because campaigning is not a one off thing. It's constant, really, when we're looking at how we get that change in our society as well. So that was, that was incredible, but, yeah, a really inspiring application, creative. But the thing for me was that evidence of impact really clear under something of the problem, and the voices of people who have been impacted were absolutely front and center in that campaign.
RP:
Yeah, yeah, that's really good point, yeah. And what you say about the the need to continue campaigning, they ended up doing a follow up campaign, I think, stopped the flights too, just because of the the government's perseverance with their pursuing that the previous government, I suppose perseverance was pursuing that Rwanda policy. For those of you listening who might be interested in freedom from tortures campaign, we did two interviews earlier this year with well cobasia, who's a person with lived experience himself, who was part of the campaign, and he gave the acceptance speech For the overall award at the event. So that's a really good interview with him. And also Agustina Oliveri, who I think led the Stop The Flights campaign, the original one. And yeah, she goes into some of the clever and inventive ways they thought about campaigning, including targeting the football clubs out in Spain. So, yeah, that's really interesting, the way they did that.
CS:
And Rob, you know, this is, this is a two years ago now, but I still remember bits of this, you know, campaign. I still remember those facts. And you know that, for me, just shows the power of the Charity Awards to bring an issue that could be very contained within one part of our sector onto the center stage in the sector as well. And that platform that the Charity Awards have given, you know, freedom for torture is is incredible to see. And they would they've done incredible work on their own, but the fact the sector got behind them, and that platform was was incredible. And being able to share the challenges and the stories that they are dealing with and, yeah, certainly being able to copy some of their really creative campaign techniques. I did have lots of conversations earlier at RSPCA about, could we do some of this? You know, was, was incredible.
RP:
Oh, that's really interesting. And then so this year, there was another popular winner with LandWorks, a charity that supports ex prisoners in Devon, and they won the award for their decade of work to help ex prisoners move on from there for a criminal identity and successfully exit the criminal justice system. They operate a site in on the Dartington estate in Devon, and from there, they provide intense. Innovative support and occupational training and a strong community for people who are leaving the prison system. This seems to kind of stand out a bit from some of the other winners, in that it's a bit of a smaller charity in its size, and also the projects. It's not really a campaigning project. I suppose it's more of a they're doing an innovative thing that really works, and they've done it over quite a long period of time as well. What can you what can you remember about this project, and what what the response was like amongst the rest of the judges?
CS:
Again, we had a really, really competitive, you know, process this year with some really fantastic projects, but, and it was a difficult decision, but, but clearly, LandWorks really stood out for us. And you're absolutely right, Rob, it's a, it's a really small project, you know, down in Devon. And you know, it's not a big charity. They're a small charity, and they've been doing this for a long time. And again, that's another important insight. You don't have to have something that's brand new, you know, to come forward for the Charity Awards and but what was really important for us was that they were really able to show the the the problem they were trying to solve, which is the fact that, you know, reoffending rates of people coming out of prison are still way too high, and that the kind of current models are not as effective as they can be to be able to support people to come back into the community, and they were showing that, you know, their residuum rate of participants been a year graduating was just 5% against the national average of 37% as well, and that they were supporting people to build the key insight that we took was not just about getting a job when coming out of prison, it was actually about building a life social connections, connection to the community as well, and a sense of identity and self and and. And this was a really cost effective project as well. And we were particularly interested why I think land works. One was because the judges, and we had some incredible judges, I mean, particularly Anne Fox, you know, from clinks, was, was very complimentary about the project as well. And this is the part of the sector that Anne works, and she's an incredible judge, and was we could see the scalability of this as well, and the platform the charity boards would give land works be able to demonstrate, because it currently has no public funding, and it is funded through donations and through and through kind of voluntary income. But the potential for this to be to be scaled, and was why I think the judges wanted to draw attention to this important piece of work. And as I said, we actually had quite a flurry of applications from probation type projects this year or last year, this year, because it's still 2024, this year in the in the Charity Awards. And so this project really stood out for us as well, because you don't have to be a big charity or have something that's really flashy to be able to win the Charity Awards. This was really good and important work for a kind of part of our community that often get overlooked. But have you know this important difference they were making and able to evidence that in reducing recidivism rates for people who've been through this project was a really important outcome that we wanted to draw attention to.
RP:
Excellent you mentioned some some really important points about all the different winners there, and what was so impressive about their projects. So just to go through some of the things you talked about, so you talked about evidence of impacts, about how, yeah, the charities were able to actually show that they've achieved what they had achieved, and they were able to explain that clearly, sustainability of the projects and replicability by other charities, and also a value for money. So he talks about Freedom From Torture's, relatively thrifty campaign. Is there anything else that the charity should think about when they're trying to apply?
CS:
Yeah. I mean, you know, completely Rob those points are really important. That evidence of impact, value for money, I think, helping us to understand what's innovative about your project as well, to help it stand out from others. And, you know, thinking through sustainability, you know, particularly when it's had one off funding, how are you going to sustain that beyond the life of that funding as well? You know, really good projects that come through, you know, show that thinking about how you will sustain it. And there are lots of different methods to do that, and helping us to understand that, replicability and scalability. I think the other thing, because I've read a lot of applications, is that, you know, clearly articulate what it is you did. You know, I think projects that don't kind of make the cut into the short list for different categories are it's quite hard to unpick the model that you're working on. You know, you tell us about how it is and what it does, but not actually what it is, you know. And you know, spend a bit of time creating that narrative around. Around it as well. So that's that's helpful for us as judges, be able to understand because you will have judges that won't necessarily know your organization or know the bit of the sector that you work in as well. So helping us to understand that, because we've got some fantastic we, all our judges are fantastic and but helping them to get a sense of what you did and why it made a difference and and what was innovative about it is really important. So taking a bit of time on that application is important. And as I've said already in this podcast, it gets read many times by many different eyes as well. So that's the great thing about the Charity Awards.
RP:
Do you ever get a an application where you can read it and it's missing some key bits, like you've said about evidence and explaining the projects, but you think this could be a potential award winner. This sounds like a very impressive thing, but they just haven't quite gone through the process enough to explain it.
CS:
Yeah. I mean, sometimes you do, you do get that. And when you read these applications, you want them to be brilliant. So you're coming in with that hope and optimism, that being brilliant. And actually, what you reminded me there is that another really important thing that we haven't sort of talked about, we've talked a bit about it, Rob, is that is really drawing out how the people who are benefiting, or the people affected by the issue, and we use lots of terms, like beneficiaries or service users or clients, or, you know, insert adjective of choice, but how their voice comes before how they've been represented, how this meets their needs. You know, the insights you gather from that. That's another important part of the process as well. You know, I'm spent quite a lot of time in my career in the disability sector. And you know that nothing for us without us. You know, phrases is grilled into me. Grilled into me, not the right word, drilled into me is the right word, you know, and that's really important part of this process as well. So, but yeah, we will. We want everyone to do a good application, but, you know, we can only assess what is in the application. So if you don't tell us about the outcomes, or you don't tell us what the problem you've been trying to solve is, or you don't tell us about, you know, value for money, it's really hard for us to assess, and those are the really hard ones, because you want to go on, so it's really great. But you know, if only you put this in, we would be able to score it and be able to take it through, yeah, and I guess you've got to make tough decisions when you got that many applications coming in.
RP:
So yeah, there's a large field to pick from, what doesn't matter for charities? So what things might charities think 'Oh, this we shouldn't enter the awards because they're never going to recognize our achievements here'? I think you have mentioned previously about, you know, charity size. So charities of all different sizes can apply for these awards. What other things should charities not worry about, or should not put them off from applying?
CS:
Yeah. I mean, definitely, definitely size of charity, you know, we've had, as we've already talked about in this podcast, big charities like see ability, tiny charities like line of work winning, the overall winners. But you can see that in each of the categories as well. You know, it's, it's and the other thing is charities from different parts of the sector, you know, we've had in previous years, you know, a charity from the culture and heritage sector winning overall winner. You know, we've had, you know, overall winners have been service delivery, charities who talking about services delivered and campaigning. You know, land works was a set about service delivery, Tommy's and freedom from torture, about campaigning, see ability was about service delivery. So, you know, there's range of different things that we have. We've given those awards to so size doesn't matter, you know, location. This is not a London centric set of awards. Our judges come from across the country. You know, our you know, awards have gone to charities from across the four nations, and that's really important part of the Charity Awards as well. And and these things, the awards don't need to the submissions don't need to be about big, expensive things. And equally, we've given awards to low cost things and everything in between as well. So I think what really matters for for me as one judge around the table is, you know, really good projects that respond to or applications that respond to a really articulated need or problem and show the difference that you made and how you're sustaining that. It's that telling that story about the difference you make. And, you know, looking at Tommy's application that we talked about earlier in the podcast. I mean, that was such a clearly articulated problem. They they work to really build that solution, build that campaign. Were able to show progress and achievement around that they didn't apply too early. They applied at the right time when they were able to show government was taking the agenda seriously. And that kind of icing on the cake, to use the phrase was the fact this was actually helping Tommy's become a campaigning charity, and that's what nudged them over. So that's a good example of the kind of story you can tell for your your application. And yeah, I hope we get lots of applications this year. I've got a whole weekend lined up, you know, in April to start reading them.
RP:
And yeah, so for those charities who are now thinking, okay, maybe we will enter this year. What other reasons can you give them to do so? I mean, one thing to point out is it's free to enter charities, I suppose. I mean, I've spoke to previous winners before. They talked about how it gives them, gives their staff a bit of a morale boost, and it's nice to be recognized by their peers in the wider sector. Are there any other benefits you can think or reasons why charities should apply?
CS:
Well, obviously, you get to, you know, dress up and come to a fantastic event, you know, in London for the the Charity Awards dinner, and it is a real great event as well. So, definitely, definitely, that's a benefit. But you know, on a serious note, it is that profile that you get through the Charity Awards, and you know the content that is produced by Civil Society to showcase your work. You know from talking to previous winners before, it is that recognition of the good work you're doing. And it does have that benefit for staff morale, and it does have that benefit in demonstrating to your supporters that almost the kind of accreditation of the work that you're doing, the recognition by the Charity Awards. And you know, for me to remind our listeners, Rob, is that that recognition is from your peers. You know, this is charities making decisions on who winners are of other charities. You know, these are not, you know, our charity award judges are all from the sector or work with the sector, and have got that commitment and passion for the sector as well. So that recognition, I think, is really important. But yeah, it's that profile. It's the it's the recognition from Sector peers. It's that fundraising benefit, and it's demonstrating to supporters and to your internal audiences the difference that you're making as well. And you get to go to a really nice bash in central London, which is quite fun. And it's, yeah, it's a very fun evening as well. And you, I didn't think I told you actually, Rob, I never actually been to a Charity Awards dinner until I became a judge.
RP:
Oh, really. Exactly. Fantastic. Thank you so much, Chris, for joining us for this podcast. Are you giving us a great insight into the judging process for the Charity Awards and given, hopefully giving charities a good reason to think about applying the next year. Is there any final words you'd like to offer?
CS:
Fantastic. Thanks to Civil Society for running the Charity Awards. It takes a lot of resource from my colleagues at Civil Society. It's a brilliant set of awards. And you know, please do apply. You know, we really want to see really good applications, and because that opportunity to tell the story of the difference our sector is making. So yeah, if you're thinking about it, don't think do apply and follow the guidance, of course, but no. Thank you very much, Rob. It's great to talk to you today.
RP:
Excellent. Thank you, Chris. Thank you for listening to my chat with Chris Sherwood. Please like and subscribe to the Civil Society Podcast. Wherever you get your podcast, look out for another Charity Awards themed episode in the coming weeks, and in the meantime, I hope you stay safe and well and please visit charityawards.co.uk.
