Barking and Dagenham Community Chest case study
The community chest model brings together key representatives from across a local community to work in partnership and use local intelligence to agree funding priorities. Community chests can combine money from the NHS, the local authority as well as other sources such as, philanthropy and local businesses to create an accessible funding pot for the voluntary and community sector.
The approach was piloted in the seven boroughs of North East London, each of which used a slightly different approach to implementation to ensure that funding priorities aligned to their local population’s needs.
Barking and Dagenham (B&D) was one of these pilot sites. Recognising the historical power imbalance between the statutory and non-statutory organisations, the Community Chest in B&D was used as a way to devolve power to the Voluntary, Community, Faith and Social Enterprise (VCFSE) sector.
To date, there have been two rounds of community chest funding in B&D. This case study is based on the second round.
Goals
In Barking and Dagenham, the fund was devolved to the VCFSE sector in order to:
- Empower VCFSEs to have a say in how the fund was distributed
- Lower competition between VCFSEs
- Enable ways for VCFSEs to work in partnership with each other (to help foster connections and support joint application)
- Shift the relationship between VCFSEs and LA to support more collaboration and equality
The process
A Steering Group was formed, which consisted of members from the local authority and the VCFSE sector. This group led the process delivery, including production support for a participatory budgeting day, and were provided with admin support from the council.
There was an agreement to continue with the Participatory Funding model for the community chest that had been used in year one. This was based on the Participatory Budgeting method pioneered in Brazil.

While this method tends to engage residents, B&D developed a consortium of organisations.
37 applicants were invited to pitch at the Participatory Budgeting Event. Applicants presented a 5-minute pitch to the consortium of other applicants, with all applicants taking part in voting on the quality of the project presented to determine which projects met the desired outcomes most effectively.
The existing Open Collective online portal was used for holding and distributing funds to the successful organisations.
Criteria for funding
The scoring criteria used to assess each funding application were devised by the Steering Group.
They included:
- Equality, diversity and inclusion – a focus on supporting those who are left behind or not well provided for by the current offer
- Capacity building – applicants needed to show how they were strengthening their organisation’s capabilities to deliver projects
- Existing health priorities – proposals needed to support and compliment local health priorities
- Evidence – all proposals needed to show the impact of their work and share this with other organisations
Proposals were specifically sought from groups who may have struggled to access funding in the past, were interested in offering services in relation to social prescribing and were also interested in building relationships between each other to foster local support structures.
Use of Joy Marketplace
All VCFSE organisations were mandated to be visible on Joy Marketplace. The benefits to organisation being ‘onboarded’ to the marketplace were explained, including increased referrals and also access to an outcomes dashboard.
All organisations signed up to receive direct referrals through the marketplace. From evaluation, only two successful applicants had referrals set through Joy. Lots of other referrals were received.
How was the grant money spent?
£81,056 was used to fund projects. Applicants were paid £179.40 each for participating in the participatory budget events which took place on 7 December 2023 and 7 February 2024.
Members of the Steering Group were paid a fee of up to £2,000 each to remunerate them to follow up with awardees for next steps.
Role of the Steering Group
The remuneration for the steering group included carrying out due diligence checks on their assigned organisations and supporting them to be compliant with the eligibility requirements of the fund prior to receiving the Community Chest grant.
They also created the Barking & Dagenham Community Chest logo and Instagram account, to support and promote the activities of successful groups and the fund itself.

Members of the Steering Group also carried the administration requirements of the disbursement process and supported grant awardees with learning how to receive their grant through the Open Collective platform. They attended post participatory budget meetings and check in meetings with the LA, and supported funded organisations through the monitoring and evaluation process.
Projects funded
The successful projects from both of the funding rounds covered a wide range of activities from drama and music projects for young people to community gardening, creative crafting, cooking activities or a focus on language skills. These activities were accessed by a wide variety of residents of all ages and cultural backgrounds.
However, each project had a number of points in common. They all:
- Had a focus on wellbeing
- Engaged community members in positive learning experiences
- Had a focus on combating social isolation
- Aimed to improve community and social cohesion
- Aimed to increase happiness amongst participants
- Allowed participants to improve connections to similar activities
Every funded group was a grassroots organisation with strong community connections, and ranged from small charitable organisations and community interest companies to extremely small community groups that deliver activity on a part-time basis.
Highlights
Lessons learnt from the first year helped to facilitate the smoother running of the community chest fund in Barking and Dagenham in year two.
- 38 expressions of interest applications were submitted – a 65% increase on the numbers received in year one.
- LBBD matched the initial funding for the second year in a row, resulting in a total fund for 2024 of £96,474.
- Awarded funds were successfully disseminated by the VCFSE Steering Group to 17 organisations.
- There was significant collaboration with LBBD officers and the VCFSE steering group members, with increased positive relationships formed as a consequence.
- A WhatsApp group set up between Steering Group members made communications easier for quick discussions and decisions.
- Decision making within the Steering Group was open and democratic, with all sides listened to and decisions made in the best interests of the fund.
Feedback from funded organisation: “Business in general, and running a social business can feel lonely, applying for grants can feel tasking and competitive but I felt genuine awe for each and every business/project presented.”
What could be improved
The Open Collective platform worked smoothly but was quite time consuming for the Steering Group members overseeing the payments. Also, high payment needed to be made to host the funds which took away from the overall fund for groups. Other options may be considered moving forward.
Referrals from Social Prescribing to projects was still quite low, mainly due to a high number of projects being for young people, and that referrals received are forwarded directly to family hubs. More communications and marketing of activities will be provided for successful organisations in the future.
Of the 17 funded groups, 15 fully ran their projects to the proposed groups and in the timescales planned. However, 2 projects were not completed. This represented a significant learning point for the Steering Group. The main takeaways from this that will inform the process moving forward are:
- A clear plan of action needs to be in place in the event of projects not being delivered. The first indication of this potential challenge is if funds are not drawn down in a timely manner. In this instance, a member of the Steering Group should contact the group to ascertain if the project will indeed be delivered.
- If the project will not be delivered as agreed, sufficient time needs to be available for the funds to be reallocated to another group that did not receive funding, provided their projects meet the required criteria.
- Many small groups are unable to function when key staff are unavailable, as they are often comprised of one or two individuals. In the event of exceptional circumstances delaying delivery, funded groups should have a plan in place to respond to this eventuality. Potentially, this could be incorporated into the application process.