Our annual stakeholder survey helps us understand how we’re doing at People’s Health Trust. We want to provide the resources and support needed for communities to drive their own change locally and so it is important to hear feedback from our stakeholders.
Thank you to everyone who took part in the survey and shared their experiences with us. The response rate was 31% (107 respondents out of a possible maximum of 341), comparable to last year’s 33%.
As we move into the new year and build on our work in 2021, this will help us understand where we are doing well and, where and how we can improve our impact. Read our latest findings below.
- 96% of respondents agree that it is easy to find the information required on the website.
- Most respondents (96%) felt that the Trust communicates what it does clearly.
- 93% of respondents think that the Trust explains its approach to health inequalities clearly.
- 66% of respondents sign up to the newsletter, slightly lower than last year’s 78%, and 76% of respondents found the newsletter useful.
Feedback about communications was generally positive such as:
- Read brilliant stories of what other local people are doing for their community.
- It’s easy to navigate and find what we are looking for. Usually has references or links to findings as well.
- Recent updated infographics are a great resource for clarity.
Areas for improvement highlighted in the feedback are:
- It may need updating to be accessible for learning-disabled adults to access.
- Found the Fundable Neighbourhood maps difficult to navigate.
Customer service feedback is similar to previous years, with high levels of satisfaction with the responses to enquiries (83% felt responses were helpful).
- 63% of respondents downloaded their application from the website, 34% requested an application by email and 2% requested a form by telephone (all similar to last year).
- 53% have found the application process easy to some extent and 31% to a large extent (both similar to last year).
- 59% of respondents have contacted the Trust for additional information or advice on completing the application by either email or telephone, with a high level of satisfaction reported by those who received help.
- The guidance notes are considered helpful by 92% of respondents.
- 44% of respondents feel the amount of information requested is appropriate to some extent, and 42% to a large extent (similar to last year).
- 85% of respondents feel that the decision timescale on Active Communities is reasonable (slightly lower than last year’s 92%) and 89% of respondents received a decision on their application within the published timescale (similar to last year).
The Trust received a range of feedback about the application process including positive feedback about support received, concerns raised about the accessibility of the application journey and suggestions including the use of video applications.
- 53% of respondents say that their project relies on volunteer support to a large extent and 34% to some extent (similar to last year).
- 24% of respondents say they have lost central or local government funding in the past two – three years (slightly lower than last year’s 30%).
- 22% of respondents said they would be able to stay open if the Trust had not funded them. 55% said not having funding from the Trust would pose a small or medium risk of closure and 20% felt it posed a high risk (all similar to last year).
- 43% feel progress reporting is proportionate to a large extent and 42% to some extent (similar to last year).
- 94% find that grant payments were made efficiently to some extent or a large extent (same as last year).
- As in previous years, most respondents (96%) feel an appropriate level of support is offered on grant management.
A new question was included this year: “At this time, how critical is it to your organisation that funders such as People's Health Trust (funded by money raised through The Health Lottery) exist?”. 88% felt this was critical to a large extent and 11% to some extent.
The Trust received positive feedback such as:
- We would not have survived COVID without the support of grants and trusts like yourselves being flexible and helpful.
- The support is exemplary with all queries dealt with positively, quickly and sensitively, conducted in a friendly and professional manner.
There were also concerns raised around the level of reporting, specifically in relation for small grants and whether this was proportionate.
Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:
Respondents were asked to indicate to what extent they agree to the following statements from their projects perspective.
- 87% of respondents found marketing materials accessible to some or a large extent.
- 90% find processes appropriate and proportionate.
- Most respondents (67%) agree to a large extent that the Trust works flexibly to meet different needs of different groups.
- 83% agree to some or a large extent that the Trust provides support to work inclusively.
95% of respondents feel the Trust’s programmes reflect the diversity of the communities in which they live and work.
Response to COVID-19:
66% of respondents had a live grant during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 80% last year. Some grants were suspended due to projects being unable to deliver in-person activities. Comments about the Trust’s flexibility and support during this period are largely very positive.
56% of respondents gave additional feedback (slightly more than last year). Positive feedback comments significantly outweighed negative ones, emphasising the Trust’s responsiveness and support as well as the impact on communities. Criticisms focused on accessibility challenges for smaller groups.
How we are responding
We have recently implemented some changes to our grants reporting processes and are currently working on improving other key areas which support the survey findings. One of these changes will be the launch of a new website in Spring 2022 with focus on greater accessibility. In the new website design we have taken into account feedback about the accessibility of content and issues around the complexity of the grant application journey.