Scotland: National Rural NetworkAt the Scottish National Rural Network Highland regional event we heard from three inspiring social enterprises delivering real benefits to their communities - the GREAN project in Sutherland, the Seaboard Memorial Hall in Easter Ross and the Loft Project/Loft Trading in Keith.
In her presentation on the Seaboard Memorial Hall, Maureen Ross said she would like to see more funding for core activity, but the question was raised if this stops groups and organisations from being entrepreneurial.
What do you think? Does core funding stop organisations from coming up with new ideas to generate income for their project? Or do you think this entrepreneurial spirit continues even if there is core funding? Would more core funding help successful projects continue to run and activity to be focussed on other areas? And does a lack of core funding contribute to volunteer fatigue?
You can have your say by adding a comment to this discussion.
You can find out more about the SNRN Highland event in Rural Network Highland Regional Event Part One and Part Two.
Join the Network Now!
Core funding and entrepreneurialism
I agree with Jane, no organisation should expect funding without an assessment of their contribution or role in a community. It is concerning though that the idea of enterprise has been embraced so quickly and uncritically by the public sector.
As a small organisation we have no core funding, and survive on a mixed economy of commissioned work and grant funding for projects of benefit to the community. The grants tend to be small and therefore the contribution to core costs is minimal. The commissioned work tends to come in gluts (end of financial year spending by the public sector) and droughts (no-one initiates any work in the holidays!) which makes it impossible to manage cash flow effectively - notwithstanding the tendency in public sector finance departments to lose, delay and de-prioritise paying our invoices. No-one in the public sector has to manage finance on a week to week basis, or face the prospect of not being able to pay wages because other organisations haven't paid their invoices. Perhaps we're getting it wrong - perhaps this enrepreneurial spirit is only something the larger organisations can afford.
Nevertheless we are a feisty organisation with lots of ideas, and we are slowly growing our small income year on year. But thankfully we have a lot of energy and a very real gratitude that we are in this organisation rather than the public sector, where any entrepreneurial spirit is crushed within (we know, we left it for that reason). It is somewhat ironic that the public sector decrees entrepreneurialism is something other organisations are meant to do.
On the whole, if we had even a tiny contribution to core costs we could do much more, much better, and our entrepreneurial spirit would add value and multiply the benefits.
Core funding v entrepreneurialism
Hi Norette
I really wanted to comment on this one so have eventually registered rather than being a passive reader!
In response to your questions on the above, I would answer 'not necessarily' to all of them, with a possible 'yes' to volunteer fatigue - sometimes the struggle does get too much, particularly for volunteer boards.
'Funding' is these days taken to imply that you are being handed money on a plate by an organisation or person who is gaining nothing in goods (incl £) or services from the transaction.
The word entrepreneur means enterprising - indicating that you deliver successfully, whatever you have set out to do, by a variety of means - whatever works. (Hopefully legally, though there are some very enterprising grey area businesses out there!). So this does not preclude obtaining big funding or sponsorship or doing local fundraisers if your core work does not present you with a cash raising business opportunity.
If the work your organisation does, provides a business opportunity, then that is great, and potentially offers much more security and sustainability, if run by people with good commercial heads.
If the work your organisation does, is delivering obvious social/community benefit which supports the public sector agenda and saves public money in the long term (eg early intervention work offsetting future crises) - then the public sector should be contributing financially to that work (not funding - because they are gaining from it).
If the work your organisation does, is fulfilling, interesting, adding to rural life tho not generating any money - but without it life would continue and there would be no obvious future cost to the public purse - then fundraising of all descriptions will be the preferred option.
Its called diversity.
My big concern at the moment is that there appears to be a steady push from government (both national and local) for all types of non-profit making/vol sec/third sec orgs to become businesses. I use that word advisedly, the term social enterprises is actually being used, but in many cases wrongly, particularly from those who do not choose to understand that public sector contracts are perfectly legitimate income for social enterprises and indeed may be the only income possible.
At all costs we must strive to avoid the 'one big size' fits all scenario - I believe we go down that route at our peril.
Jane