When funders try to understand a field, they often end up seeing the organisations already within view: those that use familiar language, appear in the right databases, and surface through grant applications. But in complex social issues, that only gives a partial picture. A great deal of relevant activity remains invisible - especially work that cuts across categories, provides holistic support, or is not described in terms that fit standard funding frameworks.
NPC worked a foundation to test a different approach. Using publicly available data - charity registers, websites, reports - combined with AI tools that can read and analyse large amounts of text, they built a much wider map of who is actually working in the social cohesion field and how. What they found was striking: much of the community work that builds trust and belonging in neighbourhoods - lunch clubs, community gardens, local sports teams - doesn't call itself social cohesion. Because it doesn't use the right language, it risks falling outside the funding radar.
This session explores what that means in practice for funders. The social cohesion example is a case study, but the approach is relevant to any funder working in a complex or fragmented field. The roundtable discussion will ask: how do you define the system you're actually trying to influence? How do you build a shared vocabulary so you can see the whole field, not just the part that speaks your language? And how do you use better data to understand where money is going, where it isn't, and where funders might be duplicating effort or missing gaps altogether.
This session will be particularly relevant if you are thinking about how to see beyond the organisations already in your view, and want to understand how data and shared intelligence can support more informed, joined-up funding decisions.