National Heritage Memorial Fund
RESILIENT HERITAGE
This is a contract result notice, not an open opportunity. Details from the official award data.
This sits below the typical range for Research & Development contracts — a smaller, more accessible award. Based on 20,405 valued Research & Development tenders in our corpus.
2 Purpose of the Evaluation 2.1 The aim of the evaluation is to assess the impact of Resilient Heritage funding on increasing grantees capacity, capability and overall resilience.
2.2 We want the evaluation to address the following questions: 1.
How did overall management capacities (governance, leadership, management, fundraising, financial management, communications etc.) improve as a result of capacity building engagement?
2.
In what ways have the quality of grantees activities improved?
3.
In what ways have grantees capacity increased (scale, reach or extent of impact)?
4.
For those looking to take on the management of heritage, to what extent has the Resilient Heritage grant prepared them for this?
5.
Is there evidence that the change Resilient Heritage enables grantees to achieve leads to long term sustainability?
6.
How effective was the mentor support element?
7.
How effective was the Resilient Heritage Strength Checker in identifying needs and priorities for project planning and improving organisational strength?
2.3 The evaluation should seek to understand if grantees have increased organisational resilience, increased capacity or achieved significant strategic change, and the extent to which the programme outcomes have been achieved.
2.4 The evaluation should identify examples of best practice and effective ways of sharing learning.
A FULL DESCRITION OF THE REQUIREMENT IS INCLUDED IN THE TENDER DOCUMENT.
What the notice asks for
How effective was the mentor support element?
How effective was the mentor support element?.
2.3 The evaluation should seek to understand
2.3 The evaluation should seek to understand if grantees have increased organisational resilience, increased capacity or achieved significant strategic change, and the extent to which the programme outcomes have been achieved.
2.4 The evaluation should identify examples
2.4 The evaluation should identify examples of best practice and effective ways of sharing learning.
Sentences from the notice that state an obligation, surfaced automatically and shown in the order they appear. Not an exhaustive list — always confirm against the tender documents.
Make the case to bid
Reveal who to approach at National Heritage Memorial Fund, and generate a go-to-market strategy from their news, accounts and people.
Free to start. Named contacts come from published notices; the strategy is generated from the buyer’s news, accounts and people.
- OCID
- 14bbbe8a-69df-4b25-a5b7-cc50db8cc1d7
- Stage
- contract · Contract
- Source
- Contracts Finder
- Buyer ref
- HLF221
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source data © Crown copyright.
Who wins this kind of work
The suppliers and buyers around this opportunity — drawn from official award data. Drag to orbit; click a node to explore.
Top suppliers & buyers in Research & Development
National Heritage Memorial Fund’s tender network