Open Grants

London Public papers Two programmes

Grant performance,
out of the PDF.

Councils already rate funded projects for committee. Those RAG ratings sit in PDF appendices. In a table, you can see who is stuck, who recovered, and where risk sits by theme — across quarters, not only the latest pack.

Tower Hamlets Open explorer →

Mayor’s Community Grants

111 projects, eight quarterly packs, ward view and theme filters.

8 packs Latest Oct 25 101G · 5A · 2R
Pan-London Open explorer →

London Councils grants

Homelessness and domestic and sexual abuse partnerships — six Grants Committee packs.

6 packs Latest Nov 25 13G · 0A · 0R

How it works

From committee paper to portfolio view

Public packs

RAG ratings and officer notes already go to committee. We keep the extract next to the official meeting link.

One row per quarter

Each project, each reporting period, with the IDs already in the papers — committee refs, and 360Giving grant IDs where they exist.

Explorer + insights

Filter, follow a project over time, and see who stays amber or red.

Why the borough index exists

Awards are open. Evaluation usually isn’t.

360Giving opened award data. Evaluation still lives in PDFs. This index shows that split for London. Full table on the borough index.

Award data (360Giving)

  • 5 boroughs active publishers
  • 2 boroughs outdated (>12 months)
  • 26 boroughs with no award file
  • Who funded whom, how much, and when
  • Structured files you can download and query
Open — sometimes
GAP

Evaluation data (per-project outcomes)

  • 1 boroughs with structured eval
  • 4 boroughs with narrative eval
  • 28 boroughs with no public eval
  • RAG, spend-by-theme, geography
  • Locked in PDFs, Excel, monitoring returns
Closed — almost always
What the data can do

Inside a borough, and across them

Once those ratings are in a table, you can ask better questions.

One borough

Inside one programme

  • Trajectory Did a support plan flip Amber back to Green, or is the same project stuck?
  • Theme risk Is cost-of-living carrying more Amber this year than education?
  • Geography Where projects name a ward: is spend clustering, or are some wards quiet?
  • Handover A new officer can see the last eight quarters without digging through old packs.
Cross-borough

Pattern, not a league table

  • Coverage Who publishes structured evaluation, and who only publishes awards.
  • Same questions They work on Tower Hamlets and London Councils, even though the programmes differ.
  • How often they report Some report every quarter, some rarely, some not in public. That argues for a shared export, not 33 separate processes.
  • Pan-London view Pan-London homelessness and domestic abuse ratings, without waiting for every borough to match.

Officer RAG is a delivery rating in the papers, not an impact score. We only show it where it already appears. Tower Hamlets committee IDs are not 360Giving grant IDs.

Who it’s for

Who this is for

Officers

The last eight quarters in one place. Repeat amber versus a one-off. Whether a support plan actually changed the rating.

Members / committees

A portfolio view between meetings — not only on the night the PDF lands.

Funded organisations

Where it is already public: their own RAG trail, and a check against peers in the same theme.

Not this

Not impact evaluation. Not a league table of boroughs. Not affiliated with 360Giving, London Councils, or any council.