Award of grants 2024-25: Round 1

The Panel considers that, as much as possible, grants from the Fund should help further a station’s financial stability and future sustainability. Therefore, proposals to promote long-term financial security and posts which could become self-sustaining within the term of the grant were favoured by the Panel over applications for other support roles.

Feedback

The Panel does not provide individual feedback as a matter of course. Verbal feedback will be available, should stations wish to contact Ofcom. The Panel would strongly recommend that stations request feedback if they intend to re-submit proposals for the same post or project in the future. A project that was unsuccessful this time does not necessarily mean the same or similar project won't be funded in the future. Many of the points listed in the information below have been communicated by the Panel following previous funding rounds. The Panel would like to remind unsuccessful applicants of taking note of these matters in any future applications they may wish to make.

Read the guidance notes

A small number of stations requested grants to cover items like rent, utility bills or capital expenditure. The guidance (PDF, 244.0 KB) makes it clear that the Fund does not support these requests.

Provide all the information requested

Some applicants failed to provide the information requested in the application form, including job descriptions and financial information. Other applicants only provided a vague outline of the proposed post. Applicants should refer to the guidance notes for further detail on what should be provided.

Clarity about posts and salaries

When applying for a post to be funded, applicants should explain how they have arrived at the proposed salary.

A small number of applicants failed to state whether posts were full time or part time, or whether the sum proposed included National Insurance, pension payments, etc.

Applicants intending to employ a member of staff should ensure they are familiar with the National Living Wage legislation. Applicants intending to employ someone on a freelance basis should be familiar with HMRC rules regarding self-employment.

Several applicants who wished to engage a member of staff did not include employer NI contributions in their costings or had miscalculated them.

Commission based salary

The panel will only consider funding a post that has clear hours and a base salary that meets the national living wage. Applications should justify any claimed “On Target Earnings”.

A clear focus for posts

The Panel favoured applications for posts whose job descriptions had a clearly defined purpose. It is also helpful for the Panel when applicants show how success for the proposed role will be measured e.g. target setting.

Some unsuccessful applications suggested roles where the post-holder had a huge range of responsibilities including volunteer management, programming and even presenting daily programmes, alongside revenue development. These were often applications for Station Manager posts. The Panel was unlikely to favour such applications because the post-holder was unlikely to devote sufficient time to income generation, therefore making the investment unsustainable.

Requests for multiple posts

The Panel saw several applications for multiple posts. It is recommended that applicants decide what post would be of most value and apply for funding for that single role.

Requests for repeat funding

A small number of stations applied for extended funding for posts which have previously been funded. In requests for repeat funding, the Panel would expect to see evidence such as the performance of the post-holder to date (including income raised, for example). The panel would also need to see a good reason for repeat funding given the demand placed on the Fund.

Where there were factors that adversely affected the use of previous funding, the Panel would expect to see details so it can make as fair an assessment as possible.

Clarity about a station’s financial position

It would be helpful to the panel if they could see the most recent account information – accounts from mid-2022 do not necessarily reflect the current situation so can be difficult for the panel to take into consideration.

Some applications contained financial information which appeared to show large unrestricted reserves or significant previous years’ trading profit. Some applicants wisely provided information about such items, but others did not. 

Applicants should be aware that any lack of clarity potentially disadvantages their application, as it may give a misleading impression of the state of their finances. 

The Panel also noted that some stations are part of wider organisations which may be able to offer financial support whereas other stations were not clear about their relationship to these larger organisations.

Management fees

Several applications requested a large percentage of the requested salary for “management fees”.  The Fund does not pay these.

Have someone double check your application

One or two applications were unclear in places or hard to read.  It assists an application if a person not involved in its original writing "proofreads" it before it is submitted.

Sell your success stories

The Panel enjoyed reading concise descriptions of a station’s history and current activities, particularly those stations which were able to demonstrate their excellent work and social value.