Learning from 2006 grant recipients

Introduction

In 2006, 210 projects and agencies applied to the CFHS small grant scheme, 40 of which were successful. Applicants were successful as the result of showing that their work not only tackled the barriers to a healthy balanced diet, but also responded to local needs and priorities, built the capacity or sustainability of their project, developed their practice, or contributed to national priorities. The successful applicants came from all over Scotland, with at least one from each NHS board area. A total of just over £75,000 was awarded. A 41st project also received grant funding as the result of transferred funds from a previous grant recipient. CFHS expected funded activities to be completed by September 2007, approximately a year from when funding was awarded. 40 out of the 41 grant recipients sent reports or evaluation forms by the end, or shortly after the end of the funding period. Two of these projects were seriously delayed - that is, no activities had taken place during the funding period. Both of these delays were due to staff shortages. This report gives a snapshot of the activities of the 38 grant funded projects that had completed some, or all of their activities by September 2007. Click here for information on our small grants scheme.

How we found out what grant recipients got up to

Six months after receiving their grant, the 41 grant recipients were asked to complete an evaluation form (132 kb PDF) or to send a report. Reminders were sent to some applicants. About 14 months after grants had been awarded grant evaluation forms (or requests for reports) were sent again to eight projects that had little to report in the earlier evaluation because their planned activities had only just started or not started at all.

Did grant recipients do what they said they would do?

All of the grant recipients, except one, delivered most of the activities that they had requested funding for although some projects did change their activities slightly to suit the needs of participants. One project made significant changes to its activities because it had experienced difficulties encouraging young people to attend group-based cooking sessions. They had more success offering ‘start-up packs’ to individuals (consisting of kitchen equipment and ingredients) alongside the offer of one-to-one staff help with cooking skills.

Did grant-funded projects get help from other people and agencies?

33 out of the 38 grant recipients reported that they received help from other agencies or groups to deliver their grant funded activities. ‘In kind’ help often included access to facilities, staff time and expertise. The amount of help varied too and could consist of a telephone conversation, or it could involve access to a tutor free of charge for a whole cookery course. Most frequently mentioned ‘helpers’ included Healthy Living Initiatives, Community Health Projects, NHS agencies or staff (dietitians and health visitors), Community Learning and Development, community centres and Community cafés. Volunteers and a peer education group were also mentioned.

What were the grants used for and who with?

The most popular main activity amongst grant-funded projects was cooking skills and food preparation - half of the projects delivered these activities. In 2005 about a third of projects delivered cooking skills or food preparation skills. This increase may reflect more applications for this type of work rather than simply that these applications were more likely to be successful. Eight projects delivered a varied programme of activities; one of these worked with young carers and delivered a mixed programme of healthy snacks, health information and some cooking sessions. Another group used a community development approach to encourage a range of local community organisations to embed various healthy food activities into their existing activities. Other projects received funding for activities such as buying equipment for a youth café, developing a community garden or improving facilities at a croft used by secondary school pupils for learning croft skills.

Grant recipients worked with a wide range of people. Only ten projects delivered activities that were open to all or worked with a range of groups, the remaining 28 worked with specific groups. Some of the work with families or parents included working with families with support needs. Five of the projects working with young people and school aged children focused on work either with young carers or young people leaving care.

What happened?

Most of the projects delivering cooking or food preparation activities offered hands-on practical sessions rather than demonstrations. With the exception of one project that had only just started their activities at the time of evaluation, all projects reported some achievements as the result of their food skills sessions. Projects reported that sessions were ‘well attended’ or ‘very popular’ and participants ‘enjoyed sessions’, or had ‘increased confidence’. Two projects working with families reported that parents were sharing meals with their families more often, and were less reliant on convenience foods. Another project working with mums reported that:

"Mums have actively taken part in using the recipes and have fed back that they have used them again successfully." Family project staff member

Retail and catering activities included three community cafés, a school tuck shop, a youth café and a food co-op. Two of the café projects experienced delays in their work, both because of problems with building work or problems with accessing facilities. Despite this both projects started work by providing training for volunteers and developing some activities, including one that developed a fruit and vegetable stall. The food co-op was reported as being ‘well worthwhile’ and one of the cafés reported that grant funded activities had led to ‘better team work’. Funding for retail and catering projects was mainly used to purchase equipment and deliver training.

Eight projects delivered a combination of activities. Seven of these projects were carried out as planned, including: a family breakfast club that proved popular with local parents; cookery sessions that were a favourite part of a health promotion programme with primary aged children; volunteers that actively got involved with selling locally grown produce and an elderly residents group that benefited from a whole programme of activities for their group:

 

"A few people have been making food using some of the new ideas they have learned from the ‘learning lunches’, including making smoothies using fresh fruit.  A small herb garden has been started by one of our tenants, and anyone can take a piece of whatever they fancy…" Tenants association staff member

Only one project – a school based project reported that they had to change part of their planned mixed project. They experienced difficulties with vandalism in their school garden, but solved the problem by growing plants on school window-sills.

The two healthy food provision/health promoting projects said their work was successful. One project had encouraged young people to give presentations demonstrating what they had learnt and a young carers club said:

"We learnt that by not providing crisps and biscuits the children ate more fruit, salad and bread, so we rarely have crisps or biscuits now – fizzy juice has been replaced by fresh fruit juice and smoothies, although this has been the biggest grumble and some children have been bringing in their own coke or fizzy juice.   …. We have a board and have asked the items of food to be posted that the young carers would like to try. Provided it is a reasonable request we usually try to buy the item." Young carers club staff member

The two projects that had planned gardening work both experienced delays and had little to report. Both had experienced difficulties arranging work to be developed on their allotment sites. However, by September 2007, both of these had begun their activities. Participants of one gardening project had started cultivating the allotment ready for planting in the spring and the other gardening project had just started the process of building a community hut

What next?

29 out of the 38 projects said that they planned to continue some or all of the work that they had developed as the result of receiving grant funding. Some of the projects that were less sure about the future of their activities said that this was because they were pessimistic about their chances of receiving further adequate funding for these activities.

Projects that planned to continue activities included a few that charged a small fee to participants to attend meals or cookery sessions. These groups reported that these charges may help them to continue their activities. Sometimes groups planned to continue their activities because the grant had allowed them to invest in staff skills or equipment:

"We now have enough equipment to allow up to eight young people to cook all at the same time. All the equipment is portable enough to allow us to take it to our area-based groups…" Youth Project staff member

".. since receiving this award we have had a total of nine staff members offering this service to our service users.  When we first began this project we had only three staff members who were routinely incorporating this into their work with clients." Family support project staff member

All grant recipients will have opportunities to inform us of their work after their funded work is over. Previous grant recipients have taken part in seminars, training or conferences, or have contributed articles to the CFHS quarterly newsletter, Fare Choice, Some have added an entry to the CFHS web-based directory, or have provided case studies to our website

Further information

For further information on 2006 grant recipients download 2007 grants special edition Fare Choice (912 kb PDF).  A list of all 2006 grant recipients (87 kb PDF) is also available.

For details on what 2005 grant recipients got up to download  2006 grants special edition Fare Choice (502 kb PDF).