Evaluation report: first distribution round
July 2025
Overview
The Workforce Futures Fund | Tahua Rāngamahi Anamata opened for its first round of applications in February 2025, with the Board making funding decisions in late May 2025.
It commissioned the Centre for Social Impact to undertake a comprehensive and independent evaluation of the first funding round, as this was effectively a market test of the strategy, policies, processes and systems developed in preparation. The evaluation took place during May and June to enable the fund to make changes in time for its second funding round.
The fund’s team has prepared this summary of the Centre’s findings. You can find out more about the fund at: www.workforcefuturesfund.nz.
Evaluation process and methodology
The evaluation involved multiple data collection methods:
Focus groups and interviews:
One focus group with Board members (28 May)
Two focus groups with 5 representatives of peak bodies for the eligible sectors (3rd and 6th June)
Two focus groups with six of the eight Grant Assessment Panel members (10th and 11th June)
Two interviews with the fund’s two part time team members (the Executive Officer and Administrator).
Surveys:
Panel member survey (n=6)
Applicant survey (n=20) titled 'Improving the Application Process and Experience'. Note that this occurred prior to aplicants hearing the outcome of the funding round.
One peak body representative that couldn’t make the focus group instead completed a questionnaire.
The evaluation framework examined six key areas of the funding lifecycle: strategic direction, governance and oversight, stakeholder engagement and communication, application development and submission, assessment and recommendations, and operations and impact evaluation.
The role of key stakeholders
Board: Responsible for strategic direction, decision-making, policy-setting, and oversight of fund allocation. The Board maintained a "startup mentality" embracing learning and iteration.
Peak bodies: Eight peak bodies from the eligible sectors provided input to the fund’s development (eg were invited to feedback on the application form and communications); promoted the fund to their members and networks, and could also apply for the funds. They played a crucial role in ensuring wide sector awareness of the fund.
Grant Assessment Panel: The fund’s shareholders each nominated a sector representative who evaluated 31 applications against fund criteria and made recommendations to the Board.
Funding team: The Executive Officer and Administrator provided operational support, pre-application guidance, and stakeholder communication. They held initial conversations with approximately 100 organisations srior to application, to help people make decisions as to whether to undertake the work to apply. They provided support to the panel and Board throughout the decision making process.
Applicants: Organisations from the eight eligible sectors who submitted funding proposals. Given the tight timeframe for receiving feedback in order to be able to implement improvements prior to the second funding round, the applicants were surveyed on the process and communications, as at the time of being contacted, they had not been advised on the outcome of their application.
Key findings
What worked well:
Clear strategic direction and foundations: The Board established ambitious objectives and oversaw robust policies and processes for a successful first funding round
Strong governance: The Board fostered open conversation with diverse perspectives and maintained an adaptive approach to learning and improvement
Effective stakeholder engagement: Face-to-face early engagement with peak bodies and the panel built relationships that supported understanding of the fund and good awareness by potential applicants in the eligible sectors
Quality assessment process: The Board were satisfied with the assessment process, collaborative dynamics and effective conflict management amongst the panel for the first round
Pre-application support: Initial conversations with potential applicants proved highly valuable, with 85% of survey respondents finding communications clear and timely.
Key challenges:
Innovation definition: Lack of clarity led to many applications proposing service extensions rather than truly innovative solutions
Priority group engagement: Insufficient applications that were strongly aligned with the strategy that focussed on Māori, Pacific, and disabled people in the eligible workforce. Some applications indicated strong priority group benefits without evidence
Application quality: The approach to applications sought to balance applicant freedom to communicate in their own style, with getting information required for assessment. Many submissions were repetitive, overly lengthy (some 30 pages), or unclear about deliverables and impact and missing key aspects like a risk assessment
Assessment workload: Reviewing 31 applications was time-intensive for panel members, particularly for their first round and given the length of applications
Equity perceptions: Larger, better-resourced organisations appeared better positioned to engage with the application process. The external environment and political and funding changes also meant some potential applicants struggled to find the resource to apply.
Recommendations
Immediate improvements:
Better define innovation: Provide explicit guidance on what constitutes innovation in workforce development to help applicants self-assess eligibility. Highlight that this is a priority, but non-innovative projects that will have large scale impact are also eligible for funding.
Update criteria and exclusions. The experience of the first funding round tested the communication of the fund’s criteria. Update communications to provide better guidance on what it will and won’t fund.
Enhance application process:
Improve the application form including introducing word limits to support applicants to know what to contribute and reduce the assessment workload.
Greater pre-screening by the fund’s team (with transparency to the panel and Board), which is possible now that the fund has been through a round.
Increase the support to applicants for essential content, for example project planning and risk management.
Improve portal usability and formatting issues
Strengthen priority group engagement:
Develop targeted outreach to Māori, Pacific, and disabled people's workforce organisations
Change application and assessment forms to better identify evidence-based demonstration of priority group impact
Reduce panel workload:
Greater pre-screening processes
Review and refine assessment rubrics with panel input
Consider enhanced moderation of scoring to ensure consistency
Obtain technical expertise if required to support assessment
Governance enhancements:
Update criteria to clarify eligibility exclusions (e.g., career transition services; delivery of training)
Maintain transparent communication about funding decisions
External context and risks
The evaluation identified significant external pressures affecting the fund's implementation, including government policy changes, vocational education reforms, and funding instability across the sectors. These factors create barriers to engagement and pose risks to the fund’s impact.
Peak bodies reported that workforce organisations are feeling overwhelmed by the scale and pace of legislative changes, creating real barriers to fund engagement. This context emphasises the importance of the fund's adaptive and relational approach.
Looking forward
The first round served as an effective "market test," providing valuable insights for improvement for round two and beyond. Overall, stakeholders expressed confidence in the process, with proposed changes at an operational and engagement level.
The Board's commitment to iteration and improvement, combined with stakeholder willingness to engage constructively, positions the fund well for enhanced effectiveness in subsequent rounds.
The evaluation demonstrates that whilst the first round achieved its basic objectives, significant opportunities exist to refine processes, enhance equity, and increase impact.
The stakeholder feedback provides a solid foundation for implementing improvements that will strengthen the fund's contribution to workforce development across New Zealand's critical service sectors.
Applicant survey results highlight:
85% of applicants found communications clear and timely
90% found the Executive Officer meeting helpful for understanding the fund
80% found the application platform straightforward
73% rated the process favourably compared to other grant funding experiences
A separate summary of the applicant survey can be found on www.workforcefuturesfund.nz