Communities Fund - session five resources
18 June 2026
This document contains a summary of survey responses from 12 members of the Cairngorms 2030 Communities Fund Panel, gathered to inform the fund's future approach. Respondents offered insights on grant size ranges, suggesting minimum and maximum amounts for small, medium, and large grants. They preferred rolling applications for small grants, with fixed rounds for larger ones. While most agreed that project criteria would check eligibility before community decision-making, some felt criteria should play a greater role. For idea generation, direct applications and active outreach were favoured, and various options for community involvement in decision-making were discussed, with local panels being a popular choice. Eligibility was broadly considered open for projects aligned with Cairngorms 2030 themes, though specific groups like large organisations with other funding were deemed generally ineligible. Feedback on project scope included emphasizing broad themes and using case studies. Most respondents were happy with the revised Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) statement, which aims to support those least likely to benefit from standard funding processes. Finally, comments on the process highlighted a need for more time in online sessions and a preference for in-person meetings.
Please be aware that this summary has been generated using AI.
This document contains feedback and suggestions on a proposed grant funding program, covering key aspects like who should be able to apply, appropriate grant sizes, and how decisions should be made. Participants generally suggest tiered grant amounts, with small grants starting from around £500 and larger grants going up to £100,000 or £250,000, though some worry that very large grants might consume too much of the overall fund. There's a strong call for an accessible and straightforward application process, possibly with continuous applications for smaller grants and fixed rounds for larger ones. While direct applications are often favored, methods like distributed dialogue and community panels are also discussed, with some caution against public voting. Eligibility criteria largely focus on projects that align with the fund's themes and benefit people within the Cairngorms National Park, with suggestions to exclude academic bodies, very large businesses, or those seeking personal financial gain. There's also a clear emphasis on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI), highlighting the need for practical support for diverse applicants and ensuring EDI communities feel valued, alongside calls for clearer guidance on what ideas best fit the fund's objectives, possibly referencing the 2030 agenda.
Please be aware that this summary has been generated using AI.