Foundation Practice Rating Logo

Skip to Content

Foundation Practice Rating Logo

Skip to Content

Results Analysed 2026

The following graphs show a breakdown of the scores for the assessed foundations.

Number of foundations achieving each rating – overall and within each domain.

As with the past years, practice on diversity continues to be much weaker than practice on other domains. This year three foundations scored an A on diversity, while 57 foundations scored an A on transparency.

Overall Rating

This graph illustrates a breakdown of how the assessed foundations fared overall.

  12 foundations got an A.   35 foundations got a B.   32 foundations got a C.   21 foundations got a D.

Diversity

This graph illustrates a breakdown of how the assessed foundations fared on the diversity domain.

  3 foundation got an A.   17 foundations got a B.   39 foundations got a C.   41 foundations got a D.

Accountability

This graph illustrates a breakdown of how the assessed foundations fared on the accountability domain.

  13 foundations got an A.   29 foundations got a B.   27 foundations got a C.   31 foundations got a D.

Transparency

This graph illustrates a breakdown of how the assessed foundations fared on the transparency domain.

  57 foundations got an A.   14 foundations got a B.   21 foundations got a C   8 foundations got a D.

Domain scores for foundations which scored A’s overall

The foundations rated A overall in Year Five are very diverse. As in previous years, they include the largest foundation (Wellcome), a mid-size one (Barnwood Trust) and at least one with few staff, such as John Ellerman Foundation, which has six. They include some endowed foundations and some community foundations, also include one founded over 800 years ago (City Bridge Foundation) and a much younger one (Mission 44, founded by racing driver Lewis Hamilton).  Three of them (Mission 44, Cheshire Community Foundation, and Community Foundation for Wiltshire and Swindon received an A in each domain and overall). 

Diversity

  3   9   0   0

Accountability

  10   2   0   0

Transparency

  12   0   0   0

Domain scores for foundations which scored B’s overall

35 foundations rated B overall. Most foundations in this bracket had a C rating in diversity and an A rating in transparency; accountability had a mix with 3 foundations rated A, 22 foundations rated B and 10 foundations rated C.

Diversity

  0   8   27   0

Accountability

  3   22   10   0

Transparency

  31   4   0   0

Domain scores for foundations which scored C’s overall

32 foundations had an overall C rating. Most foundations in this bracket rated C and D in diversity and accountability. Practice on transparency was better with the majority of foundations rating A, B or C. 

Diversity

  0   0   12   20

Accountability

  0   5   15   12

Transparency

  14   10   8   0

Domain scores for foundations which scored D’s overall

21 foundations rated D overall. All foundations had a C or D rating all domains. All 21 rated D in diversity; 19 had a D rating in accountability; and 8 had a D rating in transparency. 

Diversity

  0   0   0   21

Accountability

  0   0   2   19

Transparency

  0   0   13   8

These graphs illustrate that most foundations are pretty consistent in their practice, especially for those with overall ratings of A and D. Those with overall A rating had a rating of A or B in all domains, while those with D rating had a C or D rating in all domains. In all overall rating brackets, foundations displayed better practice on transparency and worst practice on diversity.

Domain scores for foundations scoring zero in each pillar

Number of foundations scoring zero in each pillar

  Diversity – 5   Accountability – 0   Transparency – 0

The ten questions on which the foundations collectively scored highest

Q26. Does the foundation give any information on who or what it funded? 

Q15. Does the foundation publish any eligibility criteria for what it funds? (that is who as a potential recipient would be eligible for a particular grant.)

Q75. Does the foundation have an investment policy? 

Q8. Does the foundation publish on its website any information about its funding priorities?

Q25. For approximately what percentage of the foundation’s funding is information given on who makes the funding decisions (does the foundation specify the individual, or, if it is a panel, who is on that panel?)

Q4. Can you navigate the foundation’s website using only the keyboard (without a mouse)?

Q28. Is the following information provided about the awarded grants? Please tick any that apply. 

Q17. For approximately what percentage of all funding are eligibility criteria presented?

Q2. Does the foundation have a website? 

36. Does the foundation publish who its staff are on its website? 

The ten questions on which the foundations collectively scored lowest

Q69. Does the foundation publish some information of what it is doing differently as a consequence of analysis of its own effectiveness? 

Q60. Does the foundation give ways to contact them for people who have disabilities?  

Q66. Does the foundation publish any actions (however minimal) it will take to address this feedback (what they are doing differently as a consequence)? 

Q67. Does the foundation publish any analysis of its own effectiveness? (This is effectiveness of the foundation not analysis from the grantees of what they are doing with the funding) 

Q47. Any specific, numerical targets to improve the diversity of its staff? 

Q65. Does the foundation publish any feedback it receives from grant seekers and/or grantees? – this must be feedback, eg suggestions for the foundations 

Q55. Please tick all of the following targets that are included in the diversity plan for trustees. 

Q54. Any specific, numerical targets to improve the diversity of its trustees or board members?  

Q64. Different ways given for contacting the foundation concerning malpractice.  

Q31. If the foundation funds recipients in Wales, is a Welsh language format provided? 

Examples of particularly good practice 

PracticeFoundation
Provides success rates by year and grant schemeWellbeing of Women
Provides information on the grant application process in various formats including Webtext, PDF, Word, and videosThe Wimbledon Foundation
Gives comprehensive information on how the foundation prioritises applications.Legal Education Foundation
Has multiple accessibility options for one programme including programme guidance in Easy Read format, Large Print format, BSL signed video, accessibility support for BSL interpreters, language translation, scribes, and dyslexia software. Also has a widget to translate the whole website to WelshLloyds Bank of England and Wales Foundation
Gives a list, with explanations, of reasons why the foundation has turned down applications in the pastFriends Provident Foundation
Has informative pictorials in the annual report, that show which grants were awarded by theme of workThe Dulverton Trust
Publishes its recruitment policies for staff and trusteesJohn Ellerman Foundation
Presents eligibility requirements in a summary table that indicates which organizations can apply under specific circumstancesCorra Foundation

Foundation Practice Rating © 2026 | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement

The owner of this website has made a commitment to accessibility and inclusion, please report any problems that you encounter using the contact form on this website. This site uses the WP ADA Compliance Check plugin to enhance accessibility.