Sharing our research: challenges and new approaches at the Big Lottery FundSally Taylor (Evidence Unit)David Taylor (Evidence Unit)

Big Lottery Fund

What we do—Distributes 40% of National Lottery good causes

money—Our mission: Bringing improvements to

communities and people in need—£6 billion since 2004, 13,000 awards last year—Multiple, large scale programmes of activity—UK and international

What we do

The Evidence Unit

Ensure evidence is at the heart of what we

do

What we’re commissioning

Sustained change is our aspirationMoved from A, to B, to C

programm

e evaluation

thematic evaluation

programme

evaluation +

Programme evaluation +

RobustResponsive

Relevant

Robust

— Why do we want ‘more robust’ methods?

— What are ‘more robust’ methods anyway?

— What evidence do we think we’ll get?

Responsive

—Striving to influence practice—Formative approach now taken in our contracts—Supporting communities of interest; peer to

peer learning—Common data frameworks and tools (e.g. Well

being)

Relevant

— Timing— Policy relevance— Practical relevance— Widening evidence base

(What Works centres)

Spotlight on...

Well-being5 year programme, with added 2 years

Holistic definition of well-being

Capturing impact across huge range of projects

Our challenges

Keeping a focus on our missionCommissioning appropriate methodologies

Sharing the evidence effectivelyRemaining aware of pressures on grant holders

Further informationBig Lottery Fund researchwww.biglotteryfund.org.uk/research

The Alliance for Useful Evidencewww.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/alliance_for_useful_evidence

What counts as good evidence? (Nutley et al, 2012) www.nesta.org.uk/library/documents/A4UEprovocationpaper2.pdf

Inspiring Impactinspiringimpact.org

The Third Sector Knowledge Portalwww.tsrc.ac.uk/Research/KnowledgePortal/tabid/840/Default.aspx

CAYT Impact study repositoryhttp://www.ifs.org.uk/centres/caytRepository