Top Banner
Ready, Willing and Able A review of the Investment and Contract Readiness Fund DATA PACK March 2014
37
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

Ready, Willing and AbleA review of the Investment and Contract Readiness Fund

DATA PACK

March 2014

Page 2: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 2

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Ventures approached ICRF providers for support over a range of dimensions

0

20

40

60

# of respondents

910

45

25

54

11

19

39

22%

64%

53%

12% 11%

29%

13%

46%

1810

2233 37

61 64

44

27 4028

28 24

20 20

44

50 5039 39

18 16 11

55

100

0

20

80

40

60

% of respondents

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree

Agree

Raise

inves

tmen

t

Win 

cont

racts

Define

or b

uild

case

for g

rowth

/exp

ansio

n

Perfo

rm fin

ancia

l acc

ount

ing o

r

scen

ario/

cash

flow m

odell

ing

Mea

sure

impa

ct of

org

anisa

tion,

or

deve

lop so

cial m

ission

stra

tegy

Appro

ach

legal

issue

s

Optim

ise g

over

nanc

e

struc

ture

Stream

line

or

restr

uctu

re o

pera

tions

Raise

inves

tmen

t

Win 

cont

racts

Define

or b

uild

case

for g

rowth

/exp

ansio

n

Perfo

rm fin

ancia

l acc

ount

ing o

r

scen

ario/

cash

flow m

odell

ing

Appro

ach

legal

issue

s

Optim

ise g

over

nanc

e

struc

ture

Stream

line

or

restr

uctu

re o

pera

tions

Mea

sure

impa

ct of

org

anisa

tion,

or

deve

lop so

cial m

ission

stra

tegy

What were your primary goals when applying to the Investment and Contract

Readiness Fund (ICRF)?

'Prior to our ICRF application, our organisation had the skills and knowledge to effectively...'

64% of survey respondents were looking to raise investment

64% of survey respondents were looking to raise investment

Ventures were less confident on technical issues (law, governance etc.)

Ventures were less confident on technical issues (law, governance etc.)

Note: Left hand chart, n = 85, right hand chart n varies from 54 to 9Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 3: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 3

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers offer support in a range of dimensions

3

1312

21

3

17

5

21

1919

0

6

12

18

24

Approach legal issues

Streamline or restructure operations

Define or build casefor growth/expansion

Perform executive search or

recruitment

Other1,2,3Optimisegovernance

structure

Measure impact of

organisation, or develop

social mission strategy

# of respondents

Raise investment

Perform financial

accounting or scenario/

cashflow modelling

Win contracts

What are the primary types of support you offer to ventures through the Investment and Contract Readiness Fund (ICRF)?

What are the primary types of support you offer to ventures through the Investment and Contract Readiness Fund (ICRF)?

1. Merger and Acquisitions in non-profit sector 2. Stakeholder mgt 3. Develop services/new marketsNote: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Select all that apply

Page 4: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 4

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Previous experience the main reason for ventures choosing provider - fees generally not a factor

0

10

20

30

40

# of respondents

Series

19

26

13

16

31%

15%

16

36

43%

23%19%19%

0

10

20

30

40

50

# of respondents

Series36%

1%

55%

8%

Selecte

d pr

ovide

r bas

ed o

n

prev

ious e

xper

ience

with

them

Read

prov

ider b

iogra

phies

on

the 

ICRF w

ebsit

e

Searc

hed

for p

oten

tial p

rovid

ers

onlin

e (in

cludin

g pr

ovide

rs n

ot

yet a

ccre

dited

by t

he IC

RF)

Conta

cted

othe

r ven

ture

s for

reco

mm

enda

tions

Arrang

ed m

eetin

gs p

oten

tial

prov

iders

, spe

cify n

umbe

r: Other

Signific

antly

influ

ence

d

choic

e of

pro

vider

Influ

ence

d ch

oice

of p

rovid

er

Consid

ered

, but

did

not

influe

nce

choic

e of

pro

vider

Fee w

as n

ot co

nside

red

when

choo

sing

prov

ider

What actions did you takewhen selecting a provider?

To what extent was the provider's fee a factor in your final selection?

43% of ventures had prior experience with the provider

43% of ventures had prior experience with the provider

Fees were not a factor in selection, but 55% considered them

Fees were not a factor in selection, but 55% considered them

Note: n = 84Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 5: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 5

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Some providers have been approached by a large number of interested ventures

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

3

1

3

9

10

0

6

12

51–7526–5011–25<10  75–100

# of respondents How many ventures have approached you about the ICRF?

Some providers approached by many more ventures than possible to work with

Some providers approached by many more ventures than possible to work with

Providers vary in the extent to which they actively seek ventures

Providers vary in the extent to which they actively seek ventures

2

4

7

9

4

0

6

12

18

24

11–206–101–50 20+

# of respondents How many ventures have you approached about the ICRF?

Page 6: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 6

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Ventures that might not otherwise approach approved providers have been in contact due to the ICRF

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

46%

54%

100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Strongly agree

Agree

31%

42%

19%

8%100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nordisagree

Strongly disagree

'We are selective about which ventures we will work with'

'Ventures thatmight not otherwise approach us have

been in contact through the ICRF'

All providers consider themselves selective when choosing a ventureAll providers consider themselves selective when choosing a venture

73% of providers agree the ICRF is connecting them with new ventures73% of providers agree the ICRF is connecting them with new ventures

Page 7: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 7

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

ICRF application generally straightforward but with some difficulties (ventures' perspective)

53%

27%

20%

100

80

60

0

40

20

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree

'The ICRF application process was straightforward and easy to navigate.'

What could have improved the application process?

(optional)

53% of ventures found the application straightforward

53% of ventures found the application straightforward

Ventures looking for greater clarity on ICRF purpose and criteria

Ventures looking for greater clarity on ICRF purpose and criteria

"ICRF should make their aims clearer"

"Restrictions on grants should be clearer"

"Clearer evaluation criteria"

"Too much detail needed for a small grant"

Note: n = 83Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 8: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 8

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers suggest a number of potential dimensions for improving the application process

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

58%

15%

19%

8%100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

'The ICRF application process was straightforward and easy to navigate.'

58% of providers found the application straightforward

58% of providers found the application straightforward

Providers looking for greater clarity on ICRF purpose and criteria

Providers looking for greater clarity on ICRF purpose and criteria

What could have improved the application process?

(optional) "Scoring guide or indication of how

decisions are made"

"Streamline application form and tailor for

purpose of application"

"A more formalised feedback process would

be useful"

"For early stage organisations it would be

useful to clarify what is 'too early' "

Page 9: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 9

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Ventures are well supported during application, but some believe they could have been successful without provider

0

20

40

60

# of respondents

Series5

6%

23

28%

32

39%

35

42%

37

45%

39

47%

48

58%

48

58%

59

71%89%

37%

8%

29%

34%

100

80

0

20

40

60

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree

We could have prepared asuccessful application

without support

We felt well supported by ourprovider during the application process

2%

Very c

ollab

orat

ive

The p

rovid

er lis

tene

d to

us

Our p

rovid

er u

nder

stood

our

nee

ds

Our p

rovid

er sh

ared

inte

rim th

ough

ts or

resu

lts

The p

rovid

er m

anag

ed th

e pr

oces

s

We

unde

rsto

od w

hat o

ur p

rovid

er w

as d

oing

We

guide

d th

e ou

tcom

e

We

learn

ed fr

om th

e pr

ovide

r

We

felt a

noth

er p

rovid

er w

ould

have

help

ed u

s mor

e

How would you describe working with your provider during the application process?

37% of ventures believe they would have been successful without support

37% of ventures believe they would have been successful without support

Only 39% felt they guided the outcome, only 28% learnt from the provider

Only 39% felt they guided the outcome, only 28% learnt from the provider

Note: n = 83Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 10: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 10

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

0

6

12

18

24

68%

13

# of respondents

32% 232%

442%

8

37%

7

21%

6

89%

6

11%

1718

95%

Providers believe their support is critical to developing a successful application

We

unde

rsto

od th

e ap

plica

tion

proc

ess

Develo

ping

the

appli

catio

n was

a

colla

bora

tive

proc

ess

We

man

aged

 the

proc

ess

The ve

ntur

e ap

proa

ched

us w

ith cl

ear o

bjecti

ves

in m

ind

We

were

a pr

imar

y sou

rce

of id

eas a

nd in

sight

Ventu

re w

as a

prim

ary s

ourc

e of

idea

s and

insig

ht

Ventu

res a

re si

gnific

antly

invo

lved

in th

e da

y to

day p

roce

ss

The ve

ntur

e un

ders

tood

the

appli

catio

n pr

oces

s

Ventu

res a

re n

ot si

gnific

antly

invo

lved

day t

o da

y

How would you best describe working with ventures on successful applications?

92% of providers do not believe ventures could successfully apply

without support

92% of providers do not believe ventures could successfully apply

without support

95% of providers describe the process of developing a successful application

as collaborative

95% of providers describe the process of developing a successful application

as collaborative

Note: n = 26 total; n=19 successful applicationsSource: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

8%

60%

32%

0

100

75

50

25

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

% of respondents 'Ventures could have prepared a successful application without our support'

Page 11: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 11

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

0

6

12

18

24

14%

3

# of respondents

45%

10

59%

41%

6

13

9

27%

6

27%32%

7

5%

1

14

64%

20

91%

Fewer providers report feeling well supported by ventures on unsuccessful applications, despite collaboration

Develo

ping

the

appli

catio

n was

a co

llabo

rativ

e

proc

ess

We

unde

rsto

od th

e ap

plica

tion

proc

ess

We

man

aged

 the

proc

ess

Ventu

res a

re si

gnific

antly

invo

lved

in th

e da

y to

day p

roce

ss

The ve

ntur

e un

ders

tood

the

appli

catio

n pr

oces

s

The ve

ntur

e was

a p

rimar

y sou

rce

of id

eas a

nd

insigh

t

We

were

a pr

imar

y sou

rce

of id

eas a

nd in

sight

The ve

ntur

e ap

proa

ched

us w

ith cl

ear o

bjecti

ves

in m

ind

Ventu

res a

re n

ot si

gnific

antly

invo

lved

day t

o da

y

How would you best describe working with ventures on unsuccessful applications?

Providers feelings of support from ventures varies

Providers feelings of support from ventures varies

91% of providers describe the process of developing an unsuccessful

application as collaborative

91% of providers describe the process of developing an unsuccessful

application as collaborative

Note: n=19 successful; n = 22 unsuccessfulSource: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

'We felt well supported by ventures during the application process'

32%

45%

37% 14%

32%

5%

36%

100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

The ve

ntur

e m

anag

ed th

e pr

oces

s

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Strongly disagree

Successful application

Unsuccessful application

Page 12: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 12

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers comments on factors that may have led applications that were successful versus rejected

Successful applicationsSuccessful applications Unsuccessful applicationsUnsuccessful applications

What other factors contribute to an application being successful? (optional)

" Having a discussion with the ICRF team about key factors that

are considered by the panel"

" Securing a clear understanding with the venture of the approach

to the project and the ways in which we will be working

together including individual and joint responsibilities. "

" Feedback suggests that our applications were well set out with a clear breakdown of how the budget

would be used, etc "

What other factors contribute to an application being

unsuccessful? (optional)

"Ventures' financial reserves too high"

" Proposal was insufficiently developed and focused, with lack of clear and

timed contract opportunities "

" The stage of future developments of the ventures were too early or not

sufficiently precise"

"It took us several applications to fully understand how applications were assessed. Once we

understood we were able to tailor our applications"

Page 13: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 13

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers feel most ventures would benefit from advice prior to the application process

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

14%

41%

32%

14%100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

'Ventures that do not understand the amount of work required to become

investment ready or prepare contracts are more likely to develop unsuccessful

applications'

Providers don't believe ventures understand

amount of work required...

Providers don't believe ventures understand

amount of work required......Making unsuccessful applications more likely...Making unsuccessful applications more likely

Generic baseline advice prior to application would

be beneficial

Generic baseline advice prior to application would

be beneficial

42%

12%

35%

12%100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly agree

'Ventures would have benefitted from generic baseline advice prior to the

application process'

'Most ventures underestimate the amount of work required to become investment

ready or win contracts'

31%

54%

8%

8%100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly agree

Page 14: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 14

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

59% of successful applications received full amount soughtVentures reduced scope of project if awarded less

41

59

80

60

40

20

0

100

% of respondents

A reduced amount fromwhat we had initially sought

The full amountwe initially sought

0

5

10

15

# of respondents

2

0

3

5%

1

27%

14

9%0%

14%

64%6

Reduc

ed th

e sc

ope

of th

e pr

oject

(redu

ced

pote

ntial

impa

ct)

We

cont

ribut

ed fu

nding

to p

ay fo

r full

scop

e of

wor

k

Provid

er re

duce

d th

eir

daily

rate

to p

erfo

rm th

e pr

opos

ed w

ork

We

redu

ced

our v

entu

re p

ortio

n of

the

gran

t

to p

erfo

rm th

e pr

opos

ed w

ork

Reduc

ed th

e du

ratio

n of

the

proje

ct with

out

affe

cting

its sc

ope

(com

pres

sed

time

to d

o

work w

ith sa

me

day r

ate)

Reduc

ed o

ur ve

ntur

e po

rtion

of g

rant

and

the

prov

ider r

educ

ed th

eir ra

te to

per

form

the

prop

osed

wor

k

What funding was awarded?Given that the award was less than you had

initially sought, how did that affect your business support?

59% of respondents receive the full amount

59% of respondents receive the full amount

Reduced scope the most common effect of not receiving full grant

Reduced scope the most common effect of not receiving full grant

Note: Left hand chart n = 54, right hand chart n = 22Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 15: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 15

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

More clarity and feedback could improve application process

Why do you believe the amount awarded was less than you had

applied for? (optional)

Any other comments on amount awarded? (optional)

Clarity on ICRF scope and criteria may lead to more full grants

Clarity on ICRF scope and criteria may lead to more full grants

Those who received less than full amount had mixed views

Those who received less than full amount had mixed views

"Board believed that we would gain more from the bids and would not need as much further support"

"Request was out of scope"

"ICRF wanted to reduce risk"

"Original application was too ambitious"

"Would've been useful to get more feedback on why the reward was reduced"

"Happy with the award...but question why

so much goes to the provider given the time spent and work done by

our organisation

Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 16: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 16

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Business support phase is well underway for many ventures

0

10

20

30

Business support work

has been completed

22%

Significant amount / more

than half of proposed

work

54%

Some / less than half of

proposed work

22%

None

2%

# of respondents

40

60

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

No, pleasespecify why not:

Yes

How much of the proposedbusiness support work has been

completed at this time?

Is the business support proceeding as rapidly as expected?

76% of ventures surveyed have received significant amounts of support so far...

76% of ventures surveyed have received significant amounts of support so far...

... but only 60% are proceeding as expected

... but only 60% are proceeding as expected

Most common reasons for slower progress are external factors and

change in plans

Note: n = 54Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 17: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 17

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers believe the business support they provide through the ICRF is of high quality and good value for money

'Our work is of consistently high quality'

'Our work represents good value for money'

All respondents believe they have produced high quality work...

All respondents believe they have produced high quality work...

..And all believe their work represents good value for money

..And all believe their work represents good value for money

Note: n = 15Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

73%

27%

100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Agree

Strongly agree

53%

47%

100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Agree

Strongly agree

Page 18: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 18

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Half of ventures 'Strongly agree' that they would have been unable to carry out the work without the ICRF

73%

88%

61%72%

18%

10%

29%15%

9% 10% 13%

100

80

60

40

20

0

'Our provider's work is of consistently high quality.'

2%

'The work of our provider has met or exceeded the level of support proposed

in our application.'

% of respondents

'Our organisation would have been unable to

pursue the work carried out in the business

support phase without funding from the ICRF.'

'Our provider's work represents good value for money.'

Note: n = 82Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Page 19: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 19

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Ventures are already benefitting from support, with some looking for more support in the future

7%

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

Other positive outcome

Yes, directly helped uswin contracts

Yes, directly helped usraise investment

No outcome yet, expected to directly improvement investment readiness

No outcome, none expected as a direct result

20%

16%

56%

2%

7%

7%100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

Funded the work ourselvesor re-applied withincreased self-funding

Sought other sources offunding and not proceedwithout external funding

Attempted to reapplywith a different provider

Attempted to reapplywith the same provider

Not pursued this work

13%

24%

48%

What is the quantifiable outcome of the business

support provided to date?

In practice, the length of our business support

phase is:

If our application had been unsuccessful, we would have

most likely:

40% have already had clear impact

40% have already had clear impact

28% would prefer support for longer

28% would prefer support for longer

80% would have reapplied or found other

funding

80% would have reapplied or found other

funding

Note: Left hand chart n = 53, middle chart, n = 61, right hand chart n = 54Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

100

40

80

0

20

60

58%

Unable to commenton length at this time

Longer than necessaryfor our objectives2%

Appropriate forour objectives

Too short tomeet our objectives

% of respondents

28%

11%

Page 20: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 20

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Some improvements could be made to the structure of the business support phase

25. Other comments on business support phase? (optional)

28. Any other comments on your provider? (optional)

Mixed views on the ICRF business support phase...

Mixed views on the ICRF business support phase...

...but views on providers overwhelmingly positive...but views on providers overwhelmingly positive

"Excellent scheme...helped with both expertise and

capacity"

"Application and grant process was a

traumatising experience, rules and requirements

kept changing"

"31 March financial year deadline causes problems for

financial reasons...doesn't allow for delays"

"We've already engaged our provider for another

piece of work"

"Provider needs to learn about working with the third

sector, our strengths and capabilities"

"Provided real insight and expertise"

Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 21: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 21

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Ventures agree that their organisation is better skilled following ICRF engagement

10089 86

80 76

11 14

13 2022

7 6

72

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree

Raise investment

36

Define or build case for

growth/expansion

25

4

Measure impact of organisation,

or develop strategy related to social mission

15

Perform financial accounting or

scenario/cashflow modelling

210

Win contracts

280

Approach legal issues

90 0

'Following our engagement with the ICRF to date, our organisation has the skills and knowledge to effectively...

'Following our engagement with the ICRF to date, our organisation has the skills and knowledge to effectively...

n =

Note: n shown on chart, from 36 to 9Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 22: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 22

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Unsuccessful ventures expect that providers would have had a significant impact if the business support had taken place

92%83% 81%

17% 19%8%

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree0%

Define or build case for growth/expansion

Win contracts

0%

Raise investment

0%18 1612

If our application had been successful, our provider's expertise and understanding of our organisation would have significantly helped us to...

If our application had been successful, our provider's expertise and understanding of our organisation would have significantly helped us to...

n =

Note: n shown on chart, from 18 to 12Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 23: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 23

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

ICRF engagement has left a positive impact on ventures, which are less likely to need further support

70

22

7

60

80

20

40

100

0

Agree

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree

% of respondents

59

20

21

100

80

60

0

20

40

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agreenor disagree

Disagree

'Our experience with the ICRF has given us the knowledge and skills to require less

external support in the future.'

'Our experience with the ICRF will have a positive, long-term impact on

our organisation.'

70% of ventures are more self-reliant70% of ventures are more self-reliant 60% have had a lasting impact60% have had a lasting impact

Note: Left hand chart n = 54, right hand chart n = 81Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 24: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 24

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

ICRF programme meeting and exceeding expectations with high recommendation rate

22

70

7100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

It has exceededour expectations

It has met ourexpectations

It has not metour expectations

5

23

25

43

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

Would notrecommend

Unlikely

Neutral

Likely

Highly likely

4

32. Given outcomes to date and expectations for the future, how has the

ICRF programme met your expectations?

Given your experience, how likely are you to recommend the ICRF to other ventures?

93% of grants have had met or exceeded expectations

93% of grants have had met or exceeded expectations

68% of ventures would recommend the ICRF

68% of ventures would recommend the ICRF

Note: Left hand chart n = 54, right hand chart n = 81Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 25: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 25

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Ventures believe that scope and criteria of applications most common reason for rejection

36 3629 25 21 18 18 18

43

18

1414 21 32

18 18

21

4657 61 57

50

64 64

100

0

60

80

20

40

X Axis

% of respondents

Our provider had devoted more time to

the application

Our provider had more

expertise in the proposed

work area

We had more expertise in

the proposed work areas

Our provider had been

more involved in the process

Agree

Our provider had a better

understanding of our

organisation

Neither agree nor disagree

Our provider had a deeper understanding

of our competitive landscape

We had a deeper

understanding of our

competitive landscape

Our application was better

tailored to the scope and

criteria of the ICRF

Disagree

Note: n = 28Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

'Our application would have been more likely to succeed if...''Our application would have been more likely to succeed if...'

Page 26: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 26

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Lack of time and involvement not the reason for failure

14 14 11 11 11

43

29 32

187

43 43

43

57 57

7182

54 54

60

40

20

0

80

100

We had been more involved in the process

Disagree

We had worked with a different

provider

% of respondents

The scope of our proposed had been less

X Axis

Neither disagree nor agree

The scope of our proposed

work had been greater

We had applied for more money

We had devoted more time to the

application

Agree

We had applied for less money

44

Note: n = 28Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

'Our application would have been more likely to succeed if...''Our application would have been more likely to succeed if...'

Page 27: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 27

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Many rejected applications were inappropriate for ICRF support

0

5

10

15

Provider did not produce quality work

Y Axis

OtherOur reserves and balance sheet were too stong

(panel believed we should fund ourselves)

We asked for too much

funding

Our application

was not in line with what the

ICRF supports

11%7%

46%

4%

32%

Applications rejected as they didn't match ICRF scope

Applications rejected as they didn't match ICRF scope

Poor feedback discourages further applications

Poor feedback discourages further applications

"Not enough feedback received"

"Not sure why we were unsuccessful, criteria kept

changing"

"Our application lacked understanding of the

voluntary sector"

"Don't know"

"If other, please specify:"

What do you believe is the primary reason your application was

unsuccessful?

Note: n = 28Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 28: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 28

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Unsuccessful ventures look elsewhere for funding

Unsuccessful ventures look for other sources of funding

Unsuccessful ventures look for other sources of funding

Most ventures reliant on external funding for proposed work

Most ventures reliant on external funding for proposed work

0

5

10

15

# of respondents

Reapply with a different provider

Fund the work ourselves or

reapplied with increased self-funding

Not pursue this work

Reapply with the same provider

Seek other sources of

funding for this work, and not proceeded

without external funding

11%4%

14%14%

54%

56

26

19

100

20

60

40

80

0

%

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

'Our organisation was unable to pursue the proposed work without funding from the ICRF.'

Note: n = 28Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 29: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 29

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Application process itself does not leave most ventures with better knowledge or skills

1319

27

2725

27

60 564580

0

20

40

60

100

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Define or build case for growth/expansion

Raise investmentWin contracts

% of respondents

Note: n ranges from 16 to 11Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

'We gained knowledge and skills during the ICRF application process that will help us to effectively: 'We gained knowledge and skills during the ICRF application process that will help us to effectively:

Page 30: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 30

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

15% of ventures would pay to hire provider in future

11

7

11

52

15

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

4

"Would you consider paying for your provider's services in the future?"

Ventures would hire provider again, but face financial constraints

Ventures would hire provider again, but face financial constraints

ICRF application process did not leave ventures more self sufficient

ICRF application process did not leave ventures more self sufficient

11

30

59

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

'We gained knowledge and skills during the ICRF application process that will help us

require less external support in the future.'

Note: n = 27Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

No, we would not seek this kind of support in the future

No, but we would consider seeking funding for another provider to provide similar services

No, but we would consider paying for another provider to provide similar services

Yes, but only if we had financial support as it is not a priority for us

Yes, but only if we had financial support as we could not otherwise afford the cost

Yes, we would pay to hire our provider in the future

Page 31: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 31

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Business support has had a clear and immediate positive impact on ventures

33

59

35

60

1525

76

9084

90

69

100

0

20

40

60

80

100+30%

Define or build case for

growth/expansion

Cashflow modellingRaise investment

+54%+43%

+48%+31%

%

Measure impact of organisation

Win contracts

+75%

Approach legal issues

After business supportBefore business support

Note: n shown on chart, from 54 to 8Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

% of respondents who agreed with the statement'Our organisation has the skills and knowledge to effectively...'

before business support and after support

Page 32: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 32

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers describe the ICRF as enabling ventures to require less support, while also leading to sustained relationships

'Ventures that complete projects through the ICRF will need less external support in the future'

'We have sustained business relationships with ventures we worked with through the ICRF

92% of providers believe ventures will need less support in the future

92% of providers believe ventures will need less support in the future

65% of providers agree that the ICRF has led to ongoing relationships

65% of providers agree that the ICRF has led to ongoing relationships

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

58%

35%

8%100

75

50

25

0

Disagree

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

15%

50%

23%

12%100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly agree

Page 33: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 33

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

For many providers, the ICRF is described as having a positive, long-term impact on the organisation

'Our experience with the ICRF will have a positive, long-term impact on

our organisation'

In the future, do you expect the percentage of your revenue that is ICRF work to:

61% of providers describe the ICRF as having a long-term, positive impact

61% of providers describe the ICRF as having a long-term, positive impact

19% of providers expect proportion of revenue from the ICRF to increase in future

19% of providers expect proportion of revenue from the ICRF to increase in future

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

23%

38%

19%

15%

100

75

50

25

0

% of respondents

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

4%

0

6

12

18

24

Stay the same

9

Decrease

12

5

Increase

# of respondents

35%46%

19%

Page 34: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 34

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Unsuccessful applications unclear on reasons for rejection

'Our application was in line with the scope and criteria of the ICRF.'

Applications were thought to be in line with the ICRF criteria

Applications were thought to be in line with the ICRF criteria

Ventures don't believe another provider would've been more successful

Ventures don't believe another provider would've been more successful

78

11

11

80

100

20

40

60

0

Agree

% of respondents

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

'Our application would have been successful if submitted by another provider.'

11

41

48

20

40

0

80

60

100

% of respondents

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Note: n = 27Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 35: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 35

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

48% of ventures don't believe the feedback they received would help future applications

30

22

48

20

40

0

80

60

100

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Feedback from the ICRF generally unhelpful for future applications

Feedback from the ICRF generally unhelpful for future applications

'Feedback provided by the ICRF will help us be successful in future funding applications.'

Note: n = 27Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Page 36: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 36

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Most providers reduce their rates for ICRF work

43

20

37

100

80

60

40

20

0

% of respondents

We use our normal rate

We typically determine alower rate, depending onventure / scope

We use a standard (lower)rate for ICRF work

Note: n =30Source: BCG ICRF Provider Feedback Survey

0

2

4

6

8

# Providers

ICRF % of total revenue

50-75%...21-30%11-20%1-10%0%

Most providers reduce their rates to perform ICRF work

Most providers reduce their rates to perform ICRF work

For some providers, ICRF grants represent more than 50% of revenue

For some providers, ICRF grants represent more than 50% of revenue

Page 37: Icrf datapack 040314 (2)

ICRF Datapack 040314.pptx 37

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

4 by

The

Bos

ton

Con

sulti

ng G

roup

, Inc

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

Providers are mixed on their likelihood of recommending the ICRF to other providers and ventures

Note: n = 26Source: BCG ICRF Feedback Survey

Given your experience, how likely are you to recommend the ICRF to other

providers?

ICRF ability to meet provider expectationsICRF ability to meet

provider expectationsLikelihood to recommend

to other providersLikelihood to recommend

to other providersLikelihood to recommend

to other venturesLikelihood to recommend

to other ventures

Given your experience, how likely are you to recommend the ICRF to other ventures?

Given outcomes to date and expectations for the future, how has the

ICRF programme met your expectations?

8%

8%

19%

35%

31%

100

0

50

25

75

Highly likely

Unlikely

Neutral

Would not recommend

Likely

% of respondents

12%

38%

42%

100

75

50

0

25

% of respondents

4%

Neutral

Likely

Would not

Highly likely

4%

Unlikely

0

6

12

18

24

Not met expectations

Met expectations

Exceeded expectations

38%

12%

50%

# of respondents