RFP QuestBeta
Awarded · ResultStage · contract

National Heritage Memorial Fund

RESILIENT HERITAGE

R&DCPV 73000000
Value£33k
Awarded14 Nov 2017
Published1 May 2018
RegionUK-wide
Outcome — awarded

This is a contract result notice, not an open opportunity. Details from the official award data.

Contract value in context
£33ktotal contract value
median £66k
this tender£0£561k

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.

The brief

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.

Key requirements

What the supplier must deliver

01

How effective was the mentor support element?

How effective was the mentor support element?.

02

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.

03

2.4 The evaluation should identify examples

2.4 The evaluation should identify examples of best practice and effective ways of sharing learning.

Derived from the notice text — always confirm against the original documents.

Buyer intelligence

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.

Source & provenance
OCID
14bbbe8a-69df-4b25-a5b7-cc50db8cc1d7
Stage
contract · Contract
Source
Contracts Finder
Buyer ref
HLF221
View the original notice on Contracts Finder

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source data © Crown copyright.

Market context

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

Scroll to explore the market network

National Heritage Memorial Fund’s tender network

Assembling the network…