Government must be prepared to take risks with public funding to solve some of the most intractable social problems, says Robert Ashton.
Would you like to know which side I dress? Probably not, although I’d no longer be surprised to be you’re asking the question as part of the due diligence process attached to the possible distribution of government grant money. You see I’ve recently embarked on the grant seeking trail and am finding it more than a little frustrating.
Perhaps my favourite recent demand was for proof of identity of each shareholder in the limited by guarantee company I run. This one was easy to answer; the clue being in the phrase ‘limited by guarantee!’
Then there is the fact that public money cannot be counted as match funding, unless it has first passed through the accounts of as private sector organisation. This one really hurts, as my philosophy and experience is that structured correctly, public/third sector partnerships can be far more innovative than anything born out of a desire to ‘do CSR’.
I shared the most spectacular list of funder requests with one of my non-exec directors. His reply was that he’d been asked fewer questions when recently arranging a mortgage for his new house. He borrowed £250k; I’m applying for a grant of £10k!
But breaking point was reached when I started to get replies from customers of my social business for letters of commitment to evidence their continued investment in the project. One said yes; one politely said no because it made him feel uncomfortable and another walked away and stopped dealing with us. The other three I hope hit ‘delete’ and forgotten I sent the email. Involving customers really is a step too far.
It’s not my style to rant. Nor do I believe in slamming those who are simply diligently doing their job. But someone somewhere needs to wake up to the fact that risks must be taken with public funding if some of the hardest social problems are to be successfully solved.
It’s worse because I’ve recently inherited. I could easily lend my venture the money it needs, or act as guarantor for a bank loan. But actually I think the risk should sit with the public sector, not with me personally. Let me tell you why.
We work in the apprenticeships marketplace where fundamental funding changes are just around the corner. We’re uniquely placed to grow as the focus moves from provider to employer funding. But we have a General Election in less than a year. Things could change in ways we cannot predict or plan for. To be blunt, government policy changes are likely to make Swarm, but they could just as quickly break it!
And so as I dress each morning and tuck everything in its preferred place, my wallet is going to remain firmly in my back pocket. I’ll happily manage risk and respond to the inevitable challenges every social entrepreneur faces on their journey to success. But I need those with the power to make or break my venture to share the risk. Is that too much to ask?
