This study considered whether and when the organisational development needs of voluntary and community groups that work in the fields of ethnicity and sexual orientation might be best met by support from specialist infrastructure organisations based in similar communities of interest.
What does all this mean?
The study was undertaken by Equal to the Occasion and a team of specialist consultants between October 2009 and May 2010.
Some of the broad findings from the study follow:
- Front-line groups are generally more concerned with the quality of provision than the identity of the provider. The general concerns and experiences of small BME and LGB groups were not markedly different from those of small groups in general.
- Many BME and LGB groups do however work across borough boundaries and face challenges in using borough-based voluntary infrastructure support services.
- In areas where there is not a critical mass of a beneficiary population, equality concerns may be marginalised.
- It is often hard to separate organisational development from other infrastructure functions, particularly when such approaches as community development are being used.
- There could be more partnership working between specialist and generic providers.
- Funding should be allocated more on the basis of evidence of need than in response to notions of ‘representation’ or ‘fair shares’ of funding.
- All parties should challenge unsubstantiated claims – whether about the ‘rights’ of groups to funding or about how well ‘generic’ providers reach all sections of the community.
Read more about how the study worked
We also established a reference group that advised us on the focus and approach of the study.
We answer some of the questions you may have.
Publications
Please contact us if you have any further questions.