Skip to main content
Home > Sectors > Civil society and commissioning
Share this: Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin

Before the award

 

At this stage, you should carry out:

These are discussed below.

 

Risk analysis

 

What is this?

 

Any financial agreement contains some risk [1].  It is impossible and undesirable to eliminate risk.  Risk should be managed.

 

Some programmes are inherently risky – because, for example, they deal with an innovation that may not work as hoped or a piece of research and development that may not result in the desired breakthrough for another year.  You and senior managers and Ministers need to be clear about this: given the uncertainties involved in your programme, what level of risk are you prepared to take? [2].  Further guidance on the management of innovation can be found in the NAO report “Innovation across central government” (March 2009).

 

Depending on the nature and confidentiality of such risks, you may involve stakeholders, including potential providers, in this work.  For some funds, there is a risk committee, with external members, to help with this.

 

Risk management needs to be done throughout the period of a financial agreement [3].  This first stage in this is to identify the risk before the award [3].  This will help you make decisions further into the process.  You should re-assess risk on a regular basis to identify new risks which have arisen, changes in existing risks, or risks that have ceased to exist or to be relevant.


Advice

 

There are four [4] types of risk:

  • Financial
  • Performance
  • Reputational
  • Opportunity.

 

Financial risk is the risk that the budget you and the provider have agreed may be exceeded; and/or that there is poor value for money. You should also consider risks to regularity and propriety e.g. whether a grant is spent on the purposes intended.

 

Performance risk is the risk that the objective you and the provider have agreed may not be met.

 

Reputational risk is the risk that unwanted actions of the provider may bring it, the programme or the funder into disrepute.

 

Opportunity risk is the risk that the funder or the provider, because they have not analysed risks fully and accurately and are too risk averse, decide not to take an opportunity that presents itself and so damage their effectiveness.

 

Using these headings, you should identify the risks facing your programme.  Consider whether and how these risks are already addressed e.g. by processes, controls, existing monitoring or contingency plans. Use a risk register[3] to capture and document these.  Work with your auditors on this. [5]

 

Due diligence

 

What is this?

 

Before a public funder enters into a financial agreement with a TSO, it needs to check that the TSO is a suitable organisation to do public business with – especially that it is fit to receive public money.  This check is known as due diligence.

 

Advice

 

There is no set list of due diligence information that a funder must obtain about a potential provider [6].  Here we provide examples of the information you may need.  Use your risk register to guide you on what information to ask for.

 

The first is accounts.  These may be available from sources other than the provider itself.  For example, if the potential provider is a registered charity, the funder can check its entry on the Charity Commission website [7].  Depending on the size of the charity and its income, this can include copies of audited annual accounts.  This includes information a funder may find useful for due diligence.  You may need to ask the provider for further accounting information.  If a provider is a limited company, its annual accounts may be available through Companies House.  But funders should be able to place reliance on the provider’s audited accounts.  You can ask your organisation’s accountants for advice on this.

 

A funder may need other, non-financial, information.  For example, a funder may also require the provider to have relevant insurance (for example, insurance to cover the risk of giving bad advice to a client).  Depending on the nature of your programme, you may ask providers for copies of internal management procedures, such as policies on safeguarding children and health and safety.

 

Another source of reassurance may be certificates of membership of professional organisations and/or quality frameworks [8].  You may also be able to ‘re-use’ due diligence information that the TSO has given to another funder.

 

For the provider, collecting together the due diligence information you ask for and submitting it to you can be a burden in itself.  Ask yourself whether you need to see each item or whether you need to know that it exists.  For example, do you need to see a provider’s health and safety policy or is it sufficient to know it has one.

 

Depending on the way your funding application process is structured, you may find it helpful to collect due diligence information in ‘layers’.  For example, in a two-stage process, you might ask all the organisations in stage 1 to submit (or confirm they have, or signpost you to) initial information, such as their annual accounts (or signpost to their entry on the Charity Commission website).  In stage 2, you might ask for more detailed information, such as bank details, information about the TSO’s constitution and public liability insurance.

 


Notes

  1. Improving Financial Relationships with the Third Sector: Guidance to Funders and Purchasers, HM Treasury, National Audit Office, Office of Government Commerce, 2006
  2. Known as ‘risk appetite’.  See Chapter 5: Risk Appetite, The Orange Book: Management of Risk – Principles and Concepts, HM Treasury, October 2004
  3. Commission for the Compact
  4. The first three are drawn, with small changes in terminology, from National Audit Office, Office for Government Commerce, Good Practice Contract Management Framework, National Audit Office, 2008.  The fourth type is identified in HM Treasury, The Orange Book: Management of Risk – Principles and Concepts, HM Treasury, 2004
  5. This section draws on: National Audit Office, Managing Risks to Improve Public Services, National Audit Office, 2004; and National Audit Office, Office for Government Commerce, Good Practice Contract Management Framework, National Audit Office, 2008
  6. Most large programmes will be taken forward through procurement.  In that case, see Office of Government Commerce, An Introduction to Public Procurement, Office of Government Commerce
  7. The Charity Commission is the Government regulator of charities
  8. Such as Investors in People or PQASSO (Practical Quality Assurance System for Small Organisations) Quality Mark