A report that helped secure renewed funding.

The situation

A research network approaching the end of its initial funding period needed to make the case for renewal to its government funder.

The problem

A funding case is a particular kind of document. It has to be accurate enough to survive scrutiny from people who understand the work, and clear enough to persuade decision makers who control the money but do not share the technical background. Most reporting manages one of those and not the other.

The approach

The report was built around demonstrated achievement rather than activity. Not what the network had done, but what had changed because it existed. That reframing is the difference between a report that lists outputs and one that makes an argument.

The outcome

The network used the report as part of a successful bid for renewed government funding.

The same problem appears wherever an organisation has to justify its existence to whoever holds the budget: the evidence is rarely the issue, and the framing almost always is.