This research project, commissioned by Local Trust, explores the time-limited trust model in the context of the UK. The research applies ideas from US literature on time-limited trusts or “giving while living” and “moonshot” models, to UK state and private-backed trusts. The approach undertook a mixture of desk-research, interviews and roundtable discussions with chief executives and senior representatives of various time-limited trusts across the UK and US.

The main findings reveal that the motivation for public and private founders to set up a time-limited trust model are distinctly opposing. While private foundations are motivated to set up time-limited models to reduce a perpetual model into a finite one, state-backed foundations are motivated because they want more time than the three-to-five-year timescale typical of many grant programmes. What is interesting however, is that despite distinct motivations for its set-up, they tend to exhibit several common traits:

1. Goal driven funding
2. Focus on transformative system change
3. Greater appetite for risks and ’bigger bets’
4. Engaged and supportive grantee relationships
5. Focus on lasting change
6. Investment strategy focused on impact over longevity
7. Closing the gap behind them
8. Learning as legacy

Download the report here.

Local authorities increasingly work in partnership with other organisations to deliver services and achieve place-based outcomes. However, ensuring accountability for delivery across the partnership and assurance of performance remains a challenge. Shared Intelligence, commissioned by the LGA, has developed a guide about how local authorities can strengthen accountability and assurance of their local partnership working. This work builds on the LGA’s 2024 Improvement and Assurance Framework for Local Government and is increasingly relevant for local government reform and devolution planning.

Shared Intelligence engaged with a range of council officers involved with local partnerships. We used the findings from these discussions to develop some principles to help local authorities design flexible, yet robust accountability and assurance frameworks. Because there is such a diversity of partnerships, from statutory entities with defined assurance frameworks to informal collaborations based on shared community goals, the guide focuses on key building blocks and some core principles to be applied in the light of local context.

The guide emphasises elements of effective partnership accountability and assurance including:

• Clarity of purpose – having a clear understanding a partnership’s purpose is a prerequisite for knowing how to measure its progress, when to review the council’s involvement in it, and checking it is acting on the right information.
• Clear governance arrangements – governance is different from accountability and assurance, but clear governance and terms of reference are essential foundations.
• Proportionality – the nature and scale of assurance should be proportionate to the scale of the partnership.
• Member involvement – elected members should have the opportunity to be part of the accountability and assurance processes in relation to all significant partnerships, for example through scrutiny committees.
• Consistency with partners’ processes – partnership business should, as far as possible, be conducted in a way that builds on the accountability and assurance mechanisms of the different partners.

Case studies from unitary and district councils provide examples of how to apply these principles in practice. The guide also sets out self-assessment questions to help councils find an approach that fits the circumstances and nature of their partnerships.