Grant Funders & Social Investors

We help grant funders and social investors in a variety of ways, from evaluation of grant programmes, to analysis of potential grantees, and due diligence ahead of funding. We also provide monitoring of grantees and investees after funding.

Image for  Grant Funders & Social Investors

Since the basis of our benchmarking and databases is financial data on individual organisations, we can aggregate it up into a whole series of separate, stacked, or overlapping data clusters. This allows a portfolio to be analysed from a series of perspectives and compared against a variety of sector, turnover and geographical benchmarks.

In addition to acquiring detailed profit & loss and balance sheet data, we also run a series of financial metrics calculations across the dataset. This means that we can benchmark both individual organisations and portfolio performance against the norms across a wider sector.

At the level of a programme or investment manager, this functionality allows us to answer questions such as:

How is my programme performing over time on a set of key metrics (turnover | contribution to reserves | revenue growth | asset growth)
Which organisations are performing above or below average by comparison to the rest of the portfolio?
Which organisations are performing above or below average by comparison to the rest of their sector | region | turnover band | asset type?
Which organisations are raising red flags against a set of key metrics which are bespoke to my fund or programme?
How are organisations performing vs. targets on a quarterly | annual basis?
What are my aggregated key metrics results for the portfolio this quarter | year; and what is the pattern over time?
How do the key metrics of this programme compare against other programmes being run in my organisation?
How does my cohort perform against a comparison group of organisations where we have no involvement? For example, failed applications, or a set of sector comparisons.

This functionality allows for regular reporting, management by exception, and the setting of a RAG (Red-Amber-Green) rating system on key metrics.

In addition we can aggregate up data across the whole of a funder or investor’s portfolio, and track the changes over time. This then allows us to answer questions such as:

What are the results on key metrics by sector?
How does performance vary by sector?
Are there variations by sector according to geography | turnover band or other profile factors?
Are the default rates higher in some sectors | geographies | risk profiles than others?
What types of selection bias are prevalent (and to what extent) by comparison to a national dataset | region | sector | IMD decile etc.?
What are the risk and resilience profiles of the portfolio by comparison to a national dataset?
How does a portfolio compare to a cohort of organisations which applied unsuccessfully to join a programme or fund?