Why TNLCF Doesn’t Use a Traditional Scoring Rubric
Despite what many grant writers assume, the National Lottery Community Fund (TNLCF) does not apply a rigid, tier-specific scoring rubric with numeric weightings. Instead, since its 2021-2023 strategic shift, TNLCF has decisively moved away from formulaic scoring toward a holistic, narrative-driven, and participatory assessment model. Applications are evaluated against four core principles: community-led, inclusive and fair, sustainable and resilient, and delivering impact.
Assessors do not assign points; they sense alignment. They ask: “Does this feel true to the community? Does it share power? Does it learn, not just deliver?” This approach prioritises authenticity, relationships, and the quality of community engagement over box-ticking. Notably, only 12% of applications are declined on eligibility alone, meaning the overwhelming majority are assessed on merit. Your narrative, evidence of lived experience involvement, and clear outcomes (not outputs) carry decisive weight. For grant writers, this means shifting focus from compliance to compelling storytelling rooted in community partnership.
What Assessors Look for in Awards for All (Small Grants: £300-£10,000)
When applying for an Awards for All grant, your biggest advantage is speed and simplicity. Assessors-either TNLCF staff or local funding panel members-process these streamlined online applications with efficiency in mind. They want to see hyper-local, tangible impact: think “15 young people will gain peer mentoring skills” rather than sweeping systems change. The bar is low for entry, but it’s not low for authenticity. Impact is judged at the community level-does your project create immediate, visible benefits?
Crucially, realistic overheads are not only allowed but expected. TNLCF funds up to 20% for overheads in smaller grants, and assessors want to see justified, community-informed costings-not a fantasy budget that squeezes out staff pensions or NI contributions. For example, the Anytown Children’s Project (£9,432) stood out because they used simple, visual co-design workshops with primary school pupils to shape after-school activities, and their budget included full national insurance and pension contributions for staff. That commitment to fair costs signals sustainability and respect for the people delivering the work.
Panel members-often community representatives with lived experience-assess for alignment with TNLCF’s core principles: community-led, inclusive, sustainable, and impactful. They don’t “score” your application; they sense whether it feels true to the community. A lean, co-designed project where power is genuinely shared will always outrank a top-down plan with padded outputs. Keep your narrative honest, your budget fair, and your ownership rooted in relationship.
What Assessors Look for in Reaching Communities (Medium Grants: £10,001-£250,000)
When you step up to a Reaching Communities grant, the terrain changes. Applications are no longer processed by staff alone but by regional funding panels, and critically, 56% of these panels now include at least one community assessor with lived experience-a threefold increase since 2020. These are not professional grant-makers in suits; they are local residents, service users, or activists who understand your community's reality because they live it. They will read your application through a lens of authenticity: does this project feel real to the people it claims to serve?
Partnerships face far greater scrutiny. With 72% of Reaching Communities grants involving at least one formal partnership-up from 58% in 2019-assessors expect evidence of genuine collaboration, not tokenistic signatories. They examine your theory of change. They check safeguarding policies. And if your grant is over £20,000, a learning report becomes mandatory, not just financial returns. TNLCF no longer prioritises rigid KPIs; instead, they ask: “What do you need to learn to make this work better?” Your application must demonstrate an adaptive mindset-a commitment to evolving based on real outcomes, not just delivering outputs.
The SJCC Youth Project (£147,500) exemplifies what resonates at this tier. It partnered a community centre, a youth worker co-op, and the local authority, with three young people aged 16-19 on the steering group, holding voting rights and receiving honoraria. Impact was measured not by attendance numbers but by reduced isolation, tracked through peer-led wellbeing check-ins. This project succeeded because it shared power, valued lived experience, and prioritised learning over compliance.
What Assessors Look for in Partnerships (Large Grants: £250,001+)
When applying for a Partnerships grant (£250,001+), you’re entering a different league. Your application will be reviewed by national strategic panels, often including external advisors with expertise in systems change, infrastructure, or policy. The focus shifts radically from local project delivery to systemic influence: How will your work reshape the landscape for your community or sector? Assessors look for cross-sector collaboration that goes beyond letterhead partnerships - they want evidence of shared governance, pooled budgets, and co-design from the outset. Formal requirements escalate: you must include a theory of change, monitoring framework, risk register, and documented co-design process. Climate and equity are non-negotiable filters. Since 2022, TNLCF screens all applications for climate alignment and equity impact; applications that fail these screens are not progressed, regardless of quality.
A standout example is the Climate Commons Network (£1.2m): a consortium of seven grassroots climate groups that co-designed a shared digital platform and a “community climate apprenticeship” model. What impressed assessors was its shared governance structure (each group had equal voting rights), equitable fund distribution clauses (ensuring smaller groups received proportionate core costs), and a clear exit strategy for community ownership. The application showed humility and power-sharing - not a top-down consortium but a genuine community-led network. For large grants, assessors ask: Is this project designed with communities, not just for them? Does it create lasting infrastructure or policy change? And is the budget realistic, with justified overheads? Success requires you to think beyond your project’s boundaries and articulate how your work will ripple outward - and to prove you’ve already started sharing power.
The Universal Winning Ingredient Across All Tiers
By now, you’ve seen the pattern: scale changes scrutiny, not values. Whether you apply for £5,000 or £5 million, assessors aren’t looking for polished KPIs or flawless budgets. They’re asking a simpler, harder question: “Does this feel true to the community?”
The winning ingredient across every tier is humility, honesty, and shared authorship. That means writing plainly-using plain English over jargon-costing fairly (including realistic overheads, not zero-overhead fantasy budgets), and rooting every word in genuine relationship with the people you serve.
TNLCF has redefined what “risk” means. A high financial risk-such as a lean budget with modest reserves-is far less concerning than low community engagement risk. A top-down project with perfect spreadsheets but no co-design will rank higher risk than a messier, community-led one. Assessors sense alignment, not compliance. They want to see power shared: lived experience on steering groups, voting rights for young people, and budgets that pay community members as equal partners.
They also want to see learning, not just delivery. Instead of rigid KPIs, ask yourself: “What do we need to learn to make this work better?” Build in adaptive planning, honest reflection, and evidence gathering that serves your community, not just the funder.
Actionable advice for your next application:
- Write plainly. Avoid sector buzzwords; tell your community’s story in their voice.
- Cost fairly. Include staff pensions, NI, and indirect costs. Justify them with community-informed reasoning.
- Root in relationship. Show how power is shared-through co-design, participatory governance, and genuine partnership.
Remember: assessors aren’t scoring you. They’re sensing whether your project feels true, just, and joyful. If you can answer “yes” to that-with authenticity and evidence of shared authorship-you’ve already won the most important part of the assessment.