+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: General Chess Chat (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Loss of Grant (/thread-553.html)
Re: Loss of Grant - Derek Howie - 21-04-2013
Adam Bremner Wrote:How much money were we actually getting, and where was the majority of it going? I.e. where is the area that will be losing out?
We were getting £10,800 which represented around 28% of budgeted income. It wasn't specifically allocated to specific areas in the budget as such. I guess all areas may have to tighten their belts.
Re: Loss of Grant - Alex McFarlane - 21-04-2013
amuir Wrote:will we have enough money to host Commonwealth Champs and go to Norway Olympiad next year ?
The position of the Scottish and Commonwealth are not affected by this. The Olympiad, I believe, will have to be considered.
Re: Loss of Grant - Adam Bremner - 21-04-2013
Having a look through the list, it seems everyone on there is making an active difference to peoples lives, generally in vulnerable areas. I also believe this is the "Children and Families" category for grants. Basically, as unpopular as this may make me on here (nothing new there!), I don't see how we deserve anything from this area, unless the money is specifically targeted at grassroots. I will assume that the government have a set amount of money to hand out, and I personally would be quite uncomfortable about taking a proportion away from a lot of the people on that list, especially if a large chunk is used on Olympiad funding.
I know that the structure of applying for a grant has changed, so I wonder if the application is maybe in the wrong category for us. I mean I think we definitely deserve something from the government, don't get me wrong. Perhaps we would stand more of a chance as a sporting or educational grant? It is just unfortunate that in the meantime while things are being reshuffled that Chess Scotland is losing out.
Re: Loss of Grant - Andrew McHarg - 22-04-2013
I agree with Adam. Chess deserves funding, but we might be barking up the wrong tree here.
Re: Loss of Grant - Andy Howie - 22-04-2013
Andy
Commonwealth is covered. Norway until council meeting head to say we are due to host the glorney next year as well..
Adam
A shade over £10k or third of the budget.
Re: Loss of Grant - Andy Howie - 22-04-2013
Adam Bremner Wrote:Having a look through the list, it seems everyone on there is making an active difference to peoples lives, generally in vulnerable areas. I also believe this is the "Children and Families" category for grants. Basically, as unpopular as this may make me on here (nothing new there!), I don't see how we deserve anything from this area, unless the money is specifically targeted at grassroots. I will assume that the government have a set amount of money to hand out, and I personally would be quite uncomfortable about taking a proportion away from a lot of the people on that list, especially if a large chunk is used on Olympiad funding.
I know that the structure of applying for a grant has changed, so I wonder if the application is maybe in the wrong category for us. I mean I think we definitely deserve something from the government, don't get me wrong. Perhaps we would stand more of a chance as a sporting or educational grant? It is just unfortunate that in the meantime while things are being reshuffled that Chess Scotland is losing out.
Adam
This is where we were instructed to make the grant application. I agree we.were on a hiding to nothing once we found out who we were up against.
One of my first reactions was this was the time to press for chess as a sport and annoy the crap out of Scottish Sports Council. Still might do that!
Re: Loss of Grant - Alan Jelfs - 22-04-2013
Alex McFarlane Wrote:amuir Wrote:will we have enough money to host Commonwealth Champs and go to Norway Olympiad next year ?
The position of the Scottish and Commonwealth are not affected by this. The Olympiad, I believe, will have to be considered.
Looking on the bright side (if there is one), because we no longer get a grant, we are no longer obliged to spend all our money in the year we receive it. So, in future, we could put money aside in non-Olympiad and non-Glorney hosting years for when they do come around.
Re: Loss of Grant - David Deary - 22-04-2013
For those who want some more history on the grant that CS receives. Here is a link to something Mac pulled together a couple of years back:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.chessscotland.com/news/?p=333">http://www.chessscotland.com/news/?p=333</a><!-- m -->
Re: Loss of Grant - Chris Hampton - 22-04-2013
I've read previous postings on this subject with great interest.
As someone who has been rebuffed by potential funders on several occasions in the past six or seven years, (a sort of hobby of mine, you understand (:-)), what CS is being put through comes as absolutely no surprise to me at all. My successful bids, I have to say, were not Chess-related at all.
What little I have learned about this difficult business seems to tell me that if you want to buy rump steak, you should not go to the fishmonger's. Year on year, the market for funding becomes increasingly sophisticated and competitive and many bodies now see fit to employ professionals to obtain funding. Ironically, local organisations, able to show a benefit, seem to be favoured over national ones which tend to have a much broader and comprehensive remit.
It strikes me very forcibly that CS is a national body, which is clearly geared towards supporting a public good. It is encouraging participation in a pursuit that has as many adherents (on the quiet) as football does. It is completely ignored by a myopic Scottish Executive that seems to place active sport on a pedestal but , at the same time appears to regard Chess as little more than a pass-time for bored pensioners with little else to occupy their time.
That risible out-dated myth has to be dispelled once and for all-now!
For years, I've been advocating the need to appoint a development officer. Marketing, incidentally, is not quite the same animal as development though there are obvious links between the species. No one in the Directorate has ever said to me at any time that it would not be a good idea to have a development officer. The idea has been generally accepted, in principle, but never followed through on. A development officer would not, BTW, be solely concerned with fund-raising projects but generating funding would be part of his or her overall remit. Essentially, a D.O. would be the 'public face' of the organisation, so he or she would not be a shrinking violet of any sort! =) S/He would have to be given total freedom to operate and use his/her own initiative in terms of the strategy to be adopted and the support network to be established.
Is it really a problem for us to seize this great opportunity to raise the national profile of Chess?
I suspect that fear of change, complacency and systemic inertia have contributed to the syndrome we're confronted with.
At some level, what has happened recently may indeed prompt CS to do what I had first suggested six or seven years ago at an AGM. It need not cost the organisation an 'arm and a leg' , in my opinion. A 'payment by results' compensation system should attract the sort of ' get-up-and-go' individual who would be suitable for that post and run with it successfully.
Leaving that long-standing proposal aside I do hope that, in the much shorter term, all members will follow up on David Deary's suggestion to contact their local MSPs about all this.
If Chess Scotland were to prepare a petition to go before the Scottish Government,I would willingly sign it. I believe that only 200 names are required for it to be placed on the business agenda of the Scottish Parliament. Is it not high time the Scottish public was made aware of the way that Chess is being purposely marginalised instead of encouraged as it is, notably, in the rest of Europe, America, Scandinavia and India?
In my opinion, Chess Scotland, a national representative body, should not have to go cap in hand to anyone for financial support. State education is paid for out of the public purse and I see Chess as being ,amongst other things, an excellent form of lifelong-learning . It may, indeed, begin in schools or in the parental home but, unlike a lot of more physically demanding activities, can be continued as a pursuit or activity until a person is in his nineties (or beyond!)
Why,then, arbitrarily remove it from the education budget?
I await your comments!
Chris
Re: Loss of Grant - Ianbrownlee - 22-04-2013
Andy
I feel for you after all the hard work put in. My feeling after all the money put into Sport Scotland and the money put into football is to promote Chess as a sport. As someone who has seen money put into various sports over the years ( and dont think it culminated at the Olympics grants have been put into many sports for many years) I think the money we asked for is nothing compared to the money for e.g snowsports Scotland et al. And dont even start me on football grants. I think when you look at any records for this you will do a backwards flip. My understanding is that all the different organisations within Sport Scotland have to appear to raise some money themselves and run as a type of business. There is also I believe different grants used for development. If the likes of individuals who spend time developing chess in schools (you know who you are) could approach schools for support then we may get somewhere I like to reiterate my support and thanks for everyone who worked on the grant submission We may be down but we're not out