Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698926126718.pdf (United Kingdom)
Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 1 Spotlight Findings Paper 6 Patterns in the support delivered, the people reached and the outcomes achieved Evaluation of the Coronavirus Community Support Fund September 2021 The Coronavirus Community Support Fund (CCSF) is a funding programme supported by a grant of £187 million from Government, distributed by The National Lottery Community Fund, to help Voluntary, Community, and Social Enterprise (VCSE) organisations in England respond to the COVID-19 crisis and increase community support to people affected by the pandemic.
Ipsos MORI and partners have evaluated the programme.

This is one of a series of papers which focus in depth on themes that have emerged from the evaluation.

CCSF funding was awarded to 8,247 organisations, the majority of which supported small or medium sized community organisations1.

Nearly all grantholders used the funding to meet one or more of three needs – to adapt new (59%) and/or existing (55%) activities, to continue to operate (48%), and/or to respond to increased demand (44%).
Those who used the funding to respond to increased or changed demand used their grant to deliver a wide range of activities including: 63% 57% 43% 41% 36% 18% We promoted social connections We provided information, advice and signposting to other support We provided personal and care services We provided material and welfare support We provided activities for education and learning Other The activities delivered were reported by grantholders to have reached an estimated 6.58 million2 people, and to have led to a wide range of positive outcomes for beneficiaries.
This included nearly all (95%) grantholders stating that their beneficiaries had experienced more than one positive outcome and the majority (81%) reporting their beneficiaries had experienced four or more positive outcomes.

1 This figure slightly differs from the total no of grantholders that were eligible to take part in the grantholder survey (8,171), as the latter takes into account a small number of award withdrawals and missing data that prohibited the dissemination of the survey.
2 This figure is likely to include some double counting of individual beneficiaries that were supported by more than one of the grantholders.

Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 2 People's mental health and wellbeing was better People felt less lonely People had more social contact People were better able to respond to changing circumstances 86% 79% 70% 69% People developed better skills, strengths and assets People's short-term basic needs were met better (e.g.
financial, food, clothing, shelter) 49% 44% People's physical health was better 39% People were better supported to access the health care they needed People were better supported to access the social care services they needed Children and young people's education and development was better 33% 31% 30% People were better supported through bereavement or loss People of all ages were better protected from harm, violence or abuse People were better supported to die with dignity None of the above 20% 18% 2% 1% Grantholder reported outcomes achieved by CCSF beneficiaries Insights into the relationships between the types of activities delivered and the difference this made to beneficiaries The evaluation explored the feasibility of developing two forms of analysis (1) correlation analysis, and (2) cluster-based analysis to provide a richer narrative about the commonalities between grantholders that shared similar properties.
The purpose was to generate more in-depth insights into the relationships between what was funded, who was reached and the difference this made.

The results of this exercise highlighted the inherent challenges associated with ‘segmenting’ a programme that was not designed to fund a specific type of activity, support a specific beneficiary group or achieve a pre-specified set of outcomes, but instead was intended to flexibly fund activities and support that met diverse, local need.
However, both sets of analysis did provide some useful high-level findings that are presented below.

What activities were most commonly delivered together?

Grantholders tended to report they had used the CCSF funding to deliver multiple activities, and on average stated this had involved the delivery of three of the activities specified in the grantholder survey3.
Further analysis of this data shows that the top three activities delivered by grantholders were information, advice and signposting, provision of personal and care services and the promotion of social connections.

These were also the three types of activities that were most commonly delivered together.
This aligns with findings from the overarching evaluation, which found that many grantholders delivering 1) Information, advice & signposting 2) Personal & care services 3) promotion of social connections …were most commonly delivered together 3 This included: the provision of information, advice and signposting to other support; the provision of personal and care services; the provision of material and welfare support; the promotion of social connections; the provision of activities and support for education a nd learning; and other, none of the above and don’t know options.
Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 3 personal and care services were an important source of social connection for beneficiaries, and that many grantholders delivered information, advice and signposting in addition to their ‘core’ support.

What beneficiary outcomes were most commonly reported by grantholders to have been observed together?
1) People had more social contact 2) People felt less lonely 3) People were better able to respond to changing circumstances 4) People developed better skills, strengths and assets …were most commonly reported together Similar analysis of the outcomes that grantholders reported had been achieved by their beneficiaries showed that four of the top five reported outcomes – namely that people had more social contact, felt less lonely, were better able to respond to changing circumstances and developed better skills, strengths and assets – were most commonly reported together.
This aligns with the overarching evaluation, which found that most grantholders reported multiple outcomes for beneficiaries and that these were often closely related.

However, it should be interpreted carefully, as grantholders were asked to provide their views on the outcomes that were experienced by all the beneficiaries they supported, who were diverse in nature and may have received support from one or more of the activities offered by each grantholder.
Was the delivery of specific activities associated with the achievement of certain types of outcomes?

Correlation analysis was also undertaken to understand whether grantholders that delivered specific types of activities reported that their beneficiaries had achieved certain types of outcomes.
This showed that regardless of the activity selected, most grantholders reported personal outcomes for their beneficiaries relating to them having more social contact, feeling less lonely, experiencing improvement mental health and wellbeing, and being better able to respond to changing circumstances as a result of the support they had received.
Qualitative research with grantholders and beneficiaries found that these types of personal outcomes were often secondary and in addition to those associated with the core support being delivered by grantholders.

For example, and as noted earlier, those delivering personal and care services often provided a vital source of social connection for beneficiaries.
Similarly, those delivering food or other essential provisions often built-in additional time to check in on the health and wellbeing of recipients, which was highly valued by beneficiaries.
The analysis also showed that some activities were more strongly associated with specific outcomes: ▪ Grantholders who provided material and welfare support tended to report that their beneficiaries had been better able to meet their short-term basic needs; ▪ Grantholders who promoted social connections tended to report that their beneficiaries had more social contact and felt less lonely; and ▪ Grantholders who provided personal and care services tended to report that that their beneficiaries’ mental health and wellbeing was better.
These are the types of outcomes that could be expected from these types of activities, suggesting that grantholders were confident that the activities and support they delivered were resulting in the intended outcomes.

It also suggests that the survey design was effective in capturing data on the relationships between activities and outcomes.
Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 4 Did the evidence demonstrate any additional relationships that enabled the grouping together or segmentation of grantholders that shared common properties?

A data driven cluster or segmentation analysis using latent class analysis was developed using the responses to the CCSF activity type, target beneficiary target groups and beneficiary outcome questions from the grantholder survey.
This resulted in the development of six discrete grantholder segments, which included three segments which were well-defined and reasonably easy to interpret (classes 1-3 below), and three segments which included a wide diversity of grantholders that made them challenging to interpret (classes 4-6 below).
At an overarching level, the results demonstrated the significant level of heterogeneity of grantholders, their services, and the populations they have served and therefore the challenge of meaningfully segmenting a programme of this nature.

The descriptions below set out the key characteristics of each of the classes.

This includes the most prevalent or common target beneficiaries, activities delivered, grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported and delivery modes used.
Each characteristic is accompanied with a percentage that represents the proportion of the total grantholders in the segment with that characteristic and the associated number of grantholders4.
Class 1: Supporting disability, long-standing illness & mental health conditions Key characteristics of the grantholders in this class Target beneficiaries Activities delivered Grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported Delivery modes used People with a long- standing illness or disability (54%, 960) People with mental health conditions (42%, 740) Promotion of social connections (85%, 1,510) More social contact (95%, 1,690) Video calls/meetings (73%, 1,300) People felt less lonely (98%, 1,740) Phone calls (65%, 1,150) People’s mental health and well-being was better (96%, 1,710) Number of grantholders: 1,820; median income: £93,000; median grant: £9,950; estimated number of beneficiaries supported: 1,470,900 This class comprised mainly small organisations, who received simple grants (less than and including £10,000).
Approximately 96% of grantholders in this class (1,700) supported people with long-standing illnesses and disabilities and/or people with mental health conditions.

The promotion of social connections was the most prevalent activity delivered, which grantholders reported had led to increased social contact, better mental health and wellbeing, and their beneficiaries feeling less lonely.
Overall, this group of grantholders served over (an estimated) 1.4m beneficiaries, who were reached mainly through video calls and phone calls.

The large number of beneficiaries reported stems from the large number of organisations in this segment.

4 Please note that the reported percentages may not be exactly recoverable from the total number of grantholders reported in each class as the latter are rounded to the nearest 10.
Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 5 Class 2: Supporting children & young people Key characteristics of the grantholders in this class Target beneficiaries Activities delivered Children & young people (92%, 1,040) Support for education & learning (71%, 800) Promotion of social connections (53%, 600) Delivery modes used Video calls/meetings (67%, 750) Face-to-face (57%, 640) Grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported Children and young people’s education & development was better (95%, 1,080) More social contact (70%, 790) People felt less lonely (71%, 800) Number of grantholders: 1,130; median income: £84,901; median grant: £9,972; estimated number of beneficiaries supported: 606,000 This segment is mostly made up of small organisations, who used the CCSF funds to deliver social and educational activities to children and young people.
They delivered their activities both virtually and face- to-face.

They perceived their activities had contributed to children and young people’s education and development being better, more social contact and less loneliness.

In total, they served an around 600,000 beneficiaries, who were reached mainly through video calls/meetings but also face-to-face.
Class 3: Supporting people & families in financial hardship Key characteristics of the grantholders in this class Target beneficiaries Activities delivered People & families who face financial hardship (63%, 700) Material & welfare support (94%, 1,050) Older people (42%, 460) Delivery modes used Face to face (70%, 780) Phone calls (57%, 640) Grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported People’s short-term basic needs were better met (96%, 1,071) People’s mental health & well-being was better (68%, 760) People felt less lonely (63%, 700) Number of grantholders: 1,110; median income: £74,596; median grant: £9,995; estimated number of beneficiaries supported: 1,071,600 Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 6 This segment comprises slightly more than 1,000 small organisations, who provided, for the most part, material and welfare support to financially vulnerable groups, e.g.
people and families who faced financial hardship and older people.

Many grantholders in this class delivered their activities face-to-face, which is in line with the nature of the activities provided (e.g., delivery of support/food packages).

They reached around 1m (estimated) beneficiaries, with a median number of beneficiaries of 208, the largest of all segments.
Class 4: Support provided to a diversity of target groups via a wide range of activities Key characteristics of the grantholders in this class Target beneficiaries Activities delivered Grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported Delivery modes used Phone calls (89%, 1,530) Video calls/meetings (57%, 1,370) Messaging (76%, 1,310) People with mental health conditions (82%, 1,400) People & families who faced financial hardship (79%, 1,350) Information, advice and signposting (84%, 1,440) People’s mental health & well-being was better (98%, 1,680) Promotion of social connections (80%, 1,370) People felt less loneliness (95%, 1,640) People were better able to respond to changing circumstances (94%, 1,610) Personal and care services (65%, 1,080) Material and welfare support (63%, 1,080) Activities and support for education and learning (47%, 800) People with a long- standing illness or disability (68%, 1,160) BAME communities (58%, 1,000) Children and young people (56 %, 850) Older people (58%, 1,000) Carers (53%, 910) People at greater risk of domestic abuse (49%, 850) Number of grantholders 1,710; median income: £110,577; median grant: £10,000; estimated number of beneficiaries supported: 1,288,600 While this segment may overlap with others in terms of beneficiary types, outcomes and activities, it is distinctively characterised by the wide range of beneficiaries targeted and activities delivered.
In total, they supported over one million (estimated) beneficiaries, which is not surprising given the large number of grantholders in the segment and the variety of target groups and activities.
Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 7 Class 5: Support provided universally to all beneficiaries Key characteristics of the grantholders in this class Target beneficiaries Activities delivered Grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported Delivery modes used Universal support, none targeted (43%, 290) Information, advice & signposting (87%, 570) People felt less lonely (97%, 640) Phone calls (87%, 580) Promotion of social connections (80%, 530) Material & welfare support (67%, 440) People’s mental health & well-being was better (97%, 640) People’s ability to respond to changing circumstances was better (94%, 630) Video calls/meetings (73%, 490) Messaging (71%, 470) Number of grantholders: 660; median income: £182,529; median grant: £15,278; estimated number of beneficiaries supported: 935,200 This class included a small number of medium to large organisations, who received the largest grants (the median grant size was the largest of all the classes).
These grantholders did not indicate a particular target group for their activities, and 43% of them explicitly considered their support had been “universal”.

Grantholders in this group mainly provided information, advice & signposting and other activities related to the improvement of social connections among their beneficiaries.
Their activities were reported to have supported beneficiaries to feel less lonely, to enable better mental health and wellbeing and enable people to become better able to respond to changing circumstances.

In total, they supported more than (an estimated) 900,000 beneficiaries, who were reached through a range of delivery modes.
Class 6: The remaining grantholders that as a group did not exhibit many well-defined characteristics Key characteristics of the grantholders in this class Target beneficiaries Activities delivered Grantholder reported outcomes for the beneficiaries supported Delivery modes used Universal support, none targeted (26%, 240) Information, advice and signposting (53%, 500) Improved mental health & well-being (71%, 670) Phone calls (63%, 600) People with mental health conditions (25%, 230) Personal and care services (48%, 450) BAME communities (21%, 200) Improved ability to respond to changing circumstances (64%, 600) Video calls/meetings (58%, 550) Number of grantholders: 950; median income: £113,500; median grant: £9,965; estimated number of beneficiaries supported: 771,900 Ipsos MORI | Evaluation of CCSF: Spotlight Findings Paper 6 8 This group comprised 950 medium-sized organisations.
They did not target any particular group and more commonly provided information, advice & signposting and/or personal and care services to all beneficiaries who needed them and reached a total of over 750,000 estimated beneficiaries.
Key takeaways Given the heterogeneous nature of the grantholders in terms of activities, beneficiaries and outcomes, additional analysis was undertaken to explore whether there were any patterns that would help explain the relationships between these variables and therefore better understand the relationships between what was funded, who was supported and the difference this made.
Whilst the results have highlighted the diverse nature of the activities and support funded and the complexity involved in trying to unpick this to identify relationships between them, they have improved our insight and understanding of some grantholder cohorts and identified common linkages between some activities and outcomes, which could be used to inform future work.
Evidence sources and methodology: Grantholder survey: Ipsos MORI conducted an online survey with grantholders that received funding from the CCSF.

Fieldwork was conducted between November 2020 and April 2021 and a total of 6,712 grantholders responded.

Findings from the grantholder survey were extrapolated to estimate the overall figures among all grantholders.
This assumes that the findings among those who did not respond to the survey would have been replicated proportionally among those grantholders that did respond to the survey.

Numeric data presented in this paper represents the extrapolated data.

Latent class analysis: A data driven cluster or segmentation analysis was developed to explore the feasibility and associated value associated with assigning grantholders into discrete / non- overlapping segments.
The segments were derived using latent class analysis (LCA); LCA involves specifying, in advance, the number of classes, i.e.

segments, which will be used in the segmentation solution.

A probability is then calculated for each of the variables belonging to each class.

The variables used to create the segmentation were taken from the responses to three questions in the Grantholder survey: Q3: activity type; Q7: target groups; Q13: outcomes.
To determine the appropriate number of segments a series of LCA models was run starting first with three latent classes and then incrementing the number of classes by one, up to a maximum of eight classes.

The entropy statistic was used to identify which solution provided a better fit.

This found a 6-class solution to be preferable; with 83% entropy reached.
You can read more evaluation findings at the following weblink: https://www.tnlcommunityfund.org.uk/insights/covid-19-resources/responding-to-covid- 19/ccsf-grantholder-evaluation