Guidance

Innovation Fund 2024 to 2025: Prospectus for Local Resilience Forums

Published 24 October 2024

Applies to England

Summary

Purpose: to drive innovation, enhance local engagement and make sure communities are better equipped to prevent, respond to, and recover from emergencies.

Type of fund: Competitive

Who can apply: all 38 Local Resilience Forums (LRFs) in England are eligible to apply. An LRF in England can lead a bid for projects that increase collaboration with and contribute to the work of regional resilience partnerships in Scotland, emergency preparedness groups in Northern Ireland and LRFs in Wales.

Funding available: a proportion of £450,000

Deadline: 5pm on Monday 4 November 2024

Objectives:

• promote effective collaboration across boundaries, foster resilient communities, and encourage a whole-of-society approach to resilience
• encourage LRFs to share information, lessons and learning whether funded projects are successful or not
• support projects which will help inspire others to embrace new and innovative activities
• empower marginalised communities and enhancing partnerships between LRFs and Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations

Introduction

In an era of increasing unpredictability, the resilience of our communities is more critical than ever. The United Kingdom has faced significant challenges in recent years, from the far-reaching impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic to violent disorder that sought to undermine the strength and unity of our society. Both the COVID-19 Inquiry and Grenfell Tower Inquiry reports highlighted the crucial role of local communities and Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations in reaching and supporting marginalised groups during crises. Their grassroots knowledge and networks are indispensable in ensuring that no community is left behind.

The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 sets a strong foundation for systematic emergency planning, response, and recovery across the UK. It emphasises the importance of collaboration, strategic planning, and community engagement as the cornerstones of a resilient society. 

The 2024 to 2025 Innovation Fund builds on this foundation by fostering new approaches to community resilience, with a sharp focus on empowering marginalised groups and strengthening collaboration between LRFs and VCS organisations. The fund is designed to drive innovation, enhance local engagement, and ensure that all communities are better equipped to prevent, respond to, and recover from emergencies.

The Local Resilience Forum (LRF) Innovation Fund can play a pivotal role in driving innovations in resilience, empowering local communities, and enhancing collaboration among key stakeholders.

This prospectus sets out how Local Resilience Funds (LRFs) can bid for a proportion of this money to deliver innovative projects in 2024 to 2025, the objectives of the fund and how the fund will be managed, monitoring, and evaluated.

Section 1: Overview of the LRF Innovation Fund

Aim of Innovation Funding

Innovation Funding is designed to allow LRFs in England to try new and innovative ways of working which would not have been able to progress otherwise. The objective is to promote effective collaboration across boundaries, foster resilient communities, and encourage a whole-of-society approach to resilience.

This fund will make projects possible that may not have been viable before because of the element of risk that comes innovation. Sharing information, lessons and learning across LRFs – whether funded projects are successful or not – is a key component of the programme. We want to see projects which will help inspire others to embrace new and innovative activities.

LRF Innovation Fund’s 2024 to 2025 theme is community engagement

Following feedback from previous years of the Fund, the government has decided to:

• welcome bids that require collaboration between LRFs under the theme of community engagement. This will drive innovation within a certain area such as supporting vulnerable groups, concentrating proposals on specific elements so that LRFs find it easier to work together on bids that increase the resilience of their local communities
• maintain funding bids for collaboration between LRFs to roll out or scale up currently funded projects to more LRFs. This will help more LRFs benefit from the project, allowing for regional or national rollout to maximise impact

This year, LRFs are invited to bid for a proportion of £450,000. This theme encourages projects that prioritise inclusivity, collaboration, and innovation in building community resilience. By focusing on empowering marginalised communities and enhancing partnerships between LRFs and VCS organisations, we hope to further develop the relationships which have proven so valuable over the last few years – most recently as communities came together to respond to the violent disorder in parts of England.

To help generate ideas, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has set three design challenges that LRFs may want to seek to address. Whilst bids are welcomed for projects on any aspect under the theme of Community Engagement, applicants are strongly encouraged to consider the Design Challenges when developing their submissions. This will help the department coordinate and promote joint bids.

The Design Challenges

Design Challenge 1: Engage and empower your local community, especially marginalised groups to help prevent, respond to, and recover from emergencies that might affect them.

This challenge encourages LRFs to collaborate with VCS organisations that work directly with marginalised communities, addressing barriers these groups face in accessing emergency preparedness resources and support.

Applicants may wish to consider how to:

• identify future risks
• translate national risk to a local context to better assess likelihood and impact at the local level
• identify vulnerable groups
• reduce risk through new knowledge or techniques

Design Challenge 2: Enhance partnership with LRFs and local VCS organisations, leveraging their local knowledge, resources, networks to strengthen community resilience.

Bids could explore platforms to facilitate communication and coordination between LRFs and local VCS organisations, particularly those with strong ties to underrepresented communities they serve. Applicants may wish to consider innovative approaches to:

• foster greater collaboration between LRFs and local VCS during a response, with an enhanced focus on recovering better and faster from incidents

Design Challenge 3: Enhance community recovery capability by bringing together key partners, including VCS organisations, to foster a deep understanding of the recovery process, and upskill those leading recovery efforts to strengthen resilience.

This challenge encourages LRFs to develop new solutions that engage marginalised groups in resilience efforts and enhance collaboration during recovery phases.

Applicants may wish to consider innovative approaches to:

• fostering greater collaboration between LRFs and local VCS during a response, with an enhanced focus on recovering better and faster from incidents
• translate national risks and lessons learned to a local context to better assess likelihood and impact at the local level

Applicants may find the National Resilience Standards (NRS) useful as a guide to strengthen their design challenge consideration. The NRS are a set of individual standards for LRFs to consistently identify good practice in their level of readiness.

Section 2: Who can apply and types of bids

All 38 LRFs in England are eligible to apply for Innovation Fund. Successful applications are likely to focus on projects that demonstrate creative innovations which address the design challenges outlined above.

Eligibility to apply for Innovation Funding

The 38 LRFs in England are eligible to apply for a portion of the Innovation Fund. Bids for projects which increase collaboration with and contribute to the work of regional resilience partnerships in Scotland, emergency preparedness groups in Northern Ireland and LRFs in Wales, are welcomed, but must be led by an LRF in England. Funding can only be used to meet costs incurred in England.

Types of bid design and development

MHCLG strongly encourages bids groups of LRFs with VCS (this could be nationally, regionally or groups of LRFs seeking to address similar challenges and opportunities). Such approaches are likely to lead to wider adoption of innovative solutions. Where LRFs propose to work collaboratively, they are expected to develop a partnership agreement with clear governance and roles and responsibilities, setting out how funding will be locally managed through a lead partner.

Bids for scaling up funding will likely score higher as they offer a greater opportunity for more LRFs the chance to participate in and benefit from successful projects.

MHCLG will help LRFs to explore potential projects they may want to consider by providing the opportunity to discuss ideas through their dedicated Resilience Advisers.

We will also consider collaborative projects of new bids under the theme and existing successful projects funded by the Innovation Fund.

However, MHCLG will still welcome bids from individual LRFs. We suggest that such bids focus on specific local issues and circumstances (for example, engaging with businesses in a highly flood-prone community to develop integrated flood management plans).

Scaling or embedding a successful project

Our engagement with and feedback from LRFs has highlighted that successful projects from previous years could benefit from a small amount of additional funding to help roll them out (either within a community or across other LRFs), in turn helping to scale-up the impact.

Therefore, up to 40% of the 2024 to 2025 funding will be available to support the wider roll out and/or embedding of successful projects (subject to demand and the quality of bids). LRFs are welcome to apply for this if they meet the criteria below:

• LRFs can demonstrate strong evidence of meeting or exceeding their desired outcomes of the trial
• the LRF can demonstrate a clear plan to embed or scale-up the project
• the LRF can demonstrate clear support from other LRFs and/or LRF partners to adopt the project into their own structures and practices

We would not consider requests for scale funding where:

• the LRF is requesting additional funding to a previous award because of a delay or cost increase to the project
• the project did not meet it is expected outcomes due to flaws in the programmes design
• the LRF proposes to change the parameters and outcomes of a previously unsuccessful award

Case studies from previous rounds of the Innovation Fund

Greater Manchester LRF

Project Unity is an online platform enabling LRFs to create, unify and lead an ecosystem of ‘community supply chains,’ optimising local business specialist services before, during and after any emergency, anywhere in the UK, matching what responders need with what support organisations have. It will also match donations and spontaneous offers of help with physical donations and offers of in-kind help, Such as labour and expertise. It can broadcast to the public what donations are required, optimising donations, and reducing wastage and future management. The project will build on the progress made on Phase 2, that focused on optimising the support of the Voluntary and Community Sector.

South West LRFs (led by Wiltshire and Swindon LRF)

This project builds on the work undertaken by Lincolnshire LRF in the pilot year of funding, in developing digital dashboards. The platform takes disparate datasets on vulnerable people and supporting assets from different organisations and places them on a commonly used platform alongside information on local risk and capacity. The South West LRFs will take the project to the next level, with supporting governance procedures and processes, so the package can be rolled out to other LRFs more efficiently.

Consortium of LRFs (led by South Yorkshire LRF)

This project from 2022 to 2023 was led South Yorkshire LRF on behalf of a consortium of LRFs including North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, and Humber. The project is designed to refine and develop a prototype app, acting as a single consistent cyber incident risk assessment tool for all agencies across the four LRFs. It is designed to help a non-technical user to assess the level of risk, who needs to be involved in a response and what type of resources may be needed.

Section 3: Application questions, scoring criteria and monitoring and evaluation

Making an application

You can apply for Innovation Funding by completing this application form.

Because you will submit your bid through an online form, we recommend you write it in a word processing programme first, copying it onto the online form only when you are ready to submit.

Please keep to the word count for each of the sections. Any words beyond the word count will not be considered.

Applications must be completed and submitted no later than 5pm on Monday 4 November 2024.

MHCLG aims for bids to be assessed and moderated by Friday 29 November 2024, and winning bids will be announced early in the new year.

The department recognises that innovative projects can take time to implement and does not expect all innovation grant funding to be spent by the end of the 2025 to 2026 financial year.

This is a competitive bidding process; bids are more likely to be successful where responses strongly demonstrate the following elements:

• articulates how the LRF and subsequently all LRFs, wider partners and communities can benefit from the initiative (particularly without the burden of enduring costs to them, such as subscriptions for membership)
• best addresses the theme and design challenges detailed in this prospectus
• demonstrates strong collaboration with other LRFs in delivering proposals
• has an effective framework for capturing and sharing learning for all LRFs

Questions and criteria for scoring

Funding for a new project under the theme community engagement

Question 1 asks you to choose if you are applying for additional funding or a new bid.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored.

Question 2 asks you what you want your Innovation Fund project to be known as. Please avoid generic titles such as ‘resilience improvement project’ or ‘community collaboration tool’.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored.

Question 3 allows you to demonstrate why government funding is needed to help you address a specific problem. It gives you the opportunity to give us your evidence about why that problem needs an innovative solution. Your work to address the problem may already be underway – this question allows you to tell us what has been done to date, and how successful your progress has been.

This is also your opportunity to give us some context about the specific problem you’re trying to solve. If you’re submitting a bid alongside other LRFs, for instance, you may wish to expand on why this problem has brought several LRFs together. You may also wish to consider articulating why the absence of a solution is a barrier to LRF(s) achieving your aims, or the government’s wider aims to make the UK a more resilient nation.

Scoring guidance: This question is weighted comparatively highly. Government funding needs to be targeted so it makes the most difference. A clear definition of the problem you are trying to solve, alongside the context about what has been done before, will allow us to focus funding on tackling the most acute problems in the most innovative way possible.

Question 4 allows you to demonstrate how your project will solve the problem you’ve identified. We recommend you refer to the design challenges.

Scoring guidance: This question has the highest weighting, which is worth 30% of your application. It allows us to consider how your proposal will make a real impact on the problem you identified in question 3. Higher scores will be granted if there is a clear demonstration of that impact, with defined objectives, outputs and outcomes delivered directly by the LRF community (instead of, for example, delivered by a third party supplying a subscription to a service). An answer which details how the project will address one of the design challenges is also more likely to score higher.

Question 5 asks you about how much funding you require. There is a total of up to £450,000 available for 2024 to 2025, including the portion of the fund for scaling and embedding successful projects. To make the most impact, only a small number of projects can be granted funding. It is unlikely that innovation funding can fund the entirety of a project. This question allows you to demonstrate how you plan to use the funding, and your proposed timeline for doing so. It allows you to give details about how much you think the overall project will cost to deliver, the wider funding and activity that will support delivery, and how you will demonstrate value for money. MHCLG recognises that trialling new projects can take some time to implement. Innovation funding should be spent by the end of the 2025 to 2026 financial year – this question is your opportunity to tell us if this is feasible.

Scoring guidance: This question is weighted so we can measure whether the amount requested can realistically deliver the project outcomes. You will score higher if you can demonstrate whether spend is clear, feasible and sustainable. In addition, a higher score will be awarded if you give details about match funding or additional financial contributions to the overall project cost, as well as a plan which gives details on when you expect to spend your funding.

Question 6 asks about your intended project plan. Use this opportunity to detail your intended milestones and deliverables. Use bullet points to detail what you intend your project to deliver, and when.

Scoring guidance: This question is weighted according to the viability of the milestones you set out. Answers that will score higher will demonstrate how your project adheres to SMART principles (meaning your project delivers specific outcomes, is measurable, achievable, realistic and has timed stages).

Question 7 explores one of the key objectives of the innovation fund – how the outcomes of innovative projects, and the experiences of those who have managed and help deliver them, can be shared with LRFs to inspire further learning or activity. This question therefore allows you to demonstrate how you intend to capture the lessons learned throughout your project’s lifecycle and share it with other organisations.

Scoring guidance: A higher score will be earned if the answer can demonstrate how learning and benefits are shared amongst all 38 LRFs in England, without incurring a financial cost (for example, by not using a subscription-based model). The question is designed to measure the effectiveness and inclusiveness of sharing with other LRFs. Successful answers will identify the method, benefits, timeliness, and extent of how learning can be shared.

Question 8 allows us to quickly filter bids by the number of LRFs who are supporting each one. Most people will only select one answer. However, if you are submitting a bid on behalf of all the LRFs in your region, you can additionally select this option to let us know.

Question 9 is a way of confirming you have adequate arrangements in place to manage the project, if you are submitting a bid on behalf of more than one LRF.

Funding will be delivered through Section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003 to an LRF’s designated grant recipient. There will only be one lead grant recipient for each project, whether it is a single LRF or collaborative project. The lead grant recipient will manage funding flows within project partnerships. Where bids are submitted on behalf of more than one LRF, those collaborating must draw up a partnership agreement, which could include how the funding will be administered.

Scoring guidance: Questions 8 and 9 will be scored together. A higher score will be awarded where a cohort of LRFs are working in partnership on the project. The highest score will be awarded to LRFs who are submitting bids on behalf of their region. A higher score will be awarded to LRFs who demonstrate a clear partnership agreement is in place.

Questions 10-12 asks for the details of the sponsoring LRF and the senior responsible officer if you are completing the form on behalf of just one LRF.

Questions 13-14 asks for the details of the project lead if you are completing the form on behalf of just one LRF.

Questions 15-17 asks for the details of the sponsoring LRF and the senior responsible officer if you are completing the form on behalf of multiple LRFs.

Questions 18-19 asks for the details of the project lead if you are completing the form on behalf of multiple LRFs (this might be someone different from the project senior responsible officer).

Question 20 asks you to list all the other LRFs who are sponsoring this bid.

Question 21 asks you to confirm that the Chairs of the LRFs you have listed have agreed to sponsor this bid and have agreed the terms of the related partnership agreement.

Question 22 this is where you can give more information if you were unable to confirm question 21.

Question 23 acts as the official authorisation to submit a bid on behalf of the LRFs. It asks for confirmation that the senior responsible officer has reviewed the answers to questions 1 to 23 and is happy for them to be submitted to MHCLG as a formal bid for innovation funding.

Scoring guidance: Questions 10-23 will not be scored.

Funding to scale up or roll out an existing project

For projects applying for scaling up, additional weight will be given to those that provide clear evidence of how multiple LRFs will benefit from the project, allowing for regional or national rollout. The more LRFs that will benefit from the funding, the higher the score.

Question 1 asks if you are applying for additional funding for previous projects or a new bid.

Question 2 asks what financial year the project received Innovation Funding (pilot 2021 to 2022, year 1 on 2022 to 2023 or year 2 2023 to 2024)?

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored.

Question 3 asks you to submit the name of your project, as it was on your original bid.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored.

Question 4 asks you what the lead LRF of the project is.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored.

Question 5 asks how much funding you are requesting and what activities it will be used to fund.

Scoring guidance: This question will be scored and weighted. Question 5 asks you about how much funding you require. There is a small portion of the total £450,000 available for the portion of the fund for scaling up and embedding projects. To make the most impact, only a small number of bids can be granted funding. This question allows you to demonstrate what activities you will use the funding for. It allows you to give details about how much you think the overall project will cost to deliver, the wider funding and activity that will support delivery, and how you will demonstrate value for money. The funding should be spent by the end of the 2025 to 2026 financial year – this question is your opportunity to tell us if this is feasible.

Question 6 asks the LRF to demonstrate strong evidence of meeting or exceeding the desired outcomes of the project.

Scoring guidance: Question 6 will be scored and weighted. It carries the highest weighting. It asks for details of the action the LRF took to meet its own objectives and outcomes, including:

• resolving issues in rolling out the trial
• keeping the project on track
• what the impact of the outcomes has been on the problem they identified
• what the benefit of embedding or scaling the project will be

Question 7 asks how the project will be embedded or scaled.

Scoring guidance: Question 7 is scored and weighted and carries a comparative higher weighting to the other questions. It asks about the timeline and project plan in place for the roll out or scale up. Answers will score higher should they demonstrate how your project adheres to SMART principles. You may wish to use bullet points to list your milestone dates and deliverables for clarity.

Question 8 asks whether a ways of working partnership agreement is in place between the lead and partner LRFs.

Scoring guidance: Question 8 is scored and weighted. It is a way of confirming you have adequate arrangements in place to manage the project, if there is more than 1 LRF involved. If there isn’t more than 1 LRF involved, please select N/A. Funding will be delivered through Section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003 to an LRF’s designated grant recipient. There will only be one lead grant recipient for each project, whether a single LRF or collaborative project. The lead grant recipient will manage funding flows within project partnerships. A higher score will be awarded where a bid can demonstrate a clear partnership agreement, which we recommend includes how the funding will be administered.

Question 9 asks how many LRFs were involved/supported the project during the initial trial.

Question 10 asks you to demonstrate clear support from other LRFs and partners who wish to adopt the project into their own structures and practices.

Scoring guidance: Question 9 and 10 will be scored together and are weighted. A higher score will be awarded where a cohort of LRFs are working in partnership on the project.

Question 11 asks for details of what kind of support the project has from other LRFs.

Scoring guidance: This question is scored and weighted. Please name the LRFs who will be involved in the scale up or roll out. A higher score will be awarded where an LRF can demonstrate partner LRFs who wish to adopt the project into their own processes, rather than LRFs who are just showing an interest, and why they wish to do so.

Question 12 asks about whether any progress has been made on the project since the trial ended.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored. Set out what progress has been made on continuing the project since the funding and trial ended. This question is not scored as we are not expecting progress to be made on some projects due to lack of funding and/or resource within the LRF.

Question 13 is asking about any unspent funds from the trial of your project. Please state the figure. If all funding was spent during the trial, please state £0. If you do have funding left over from the trial, please state how it will be included in the roll out or scale up.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored.

Question 14 is asking if you are requesting additional funding to a previous award because of a delay or cost increase to the project.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored, however if you select ‘yes’ you will not be eligible for roll out or scale up funding.

Question 15 is asking whether the original project failed to meet its expected outcomes due to flaws in the design.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored, however if you select ‘yes’ you will not be eligible for roll out or scale up funding.

Question 16 is asking whether the LRF is proposing to change the parameters and outcomes of a previously unsuccessful bid that did not receive funding.

Scoring guidance: This question will not be scored, however if you select ‘yes’ you will not be eligible for roll out or scale up funding.

Questions 17-20 are asking for the contact details of the lead senior responsible owner (SRO) and the working level project lead.

Question 21 asks you to confirm your SRO has seen the proposal and has given their authorisation to submit. Please enter their name and date of approval.

Scoring guidance: Questions 17-21 will not be scored.

2023 to 2024 Funded Projects

The following is the list of projects there were funded in the 2023 to 2024 round of funding, under the theme of local businesses as active partners in resilience.

Consortium of LRFs (led by North Yorkshire LRF)

Emergency Prepared and Ready Together

The project will develop a scalable online platform connecting Yorkshire’s SMEs with crucial information on emergency preparedness. Since individual LRF websites have low engagement due to businesses operating across LRF boundaries, key information often goes unseen. This new platform will generate real-time conversational content accessible to all businesses across Yorkshire. It aims to trial a new method to prevent emergencies by providing expert knowledge to businesses and can be deployed to community leaders in a safe, responsive, and efficient way.

Thames Valley LRF

Business Code Red

The project will provide a continuous link between LRFs, local businesses, and Growth Hubs. Growth Hubs connect local, national, public, and private sector partners, serving as the centre of the business support ecosystem. The project seeks to integrate Growth Hubs into the LRFs’ preparedness and response structures—connecting LRFs directly to local businesses. This will create a new model for engagement, exploration, identification of support, and collaboration between local partners in the preparation and response to local and national emergencies.

West Mercia LRF

Business Flood Action Group

The project will implement Business Flood Action Groups, building on successful Residential Flood Action Groups that have mitigated the impact of flooding on residential properties. The business group will become actively involved in local flood resilience response plans, assisting businesses in preparing for imminent flooding and strengthening resilience against future floods. The project will also aim to quantify the economic impact of flooding on different types of businesses and the wider local economy. This information will assist in developing future flood defence and resilience schemes.

Consortium of LRFs (led by London LRF)

Resilient Urban Business and Enterprise Networks

The project aims to increase understanding of existing networks and gather views from businesses on their role in emergency preparedness. It will enhance resilience and emergency planning between local businesses and LRFs.