We consistently receive many more applications to the Essentials Fund than we are able to support. In 2024–25 we received over 900 applications across three rounds and awarded a total of 33 funds, with the vast majority of applicants expressing legitimate needs and compelling cases for support.
Over successive rounds, we have reflected that making meaningful distinctions between equally deserving artists becomes increasingly difficult for an award of this size. Merit-based approaches can be hard to apply fairly or consistently at high volume, and can introduce unconscious bias and arbitrary variation in outcomes. At the same time, a fully randomised approach, while effective at removing bias, risks leaving applicants feeling that the quality and care of their application is irrelevant, and removes the ability to provide meaningful feedback.
For Rounds Three and Four of the Essentials Fund, we are piloting different selection approaches in order to gather evidence and understand what works best. Round Four introduces a revised process, developed in direct response to learning from Round Three. We will consolidate this learning after Round Four to inform a long-term decision about how we run the Essentials Fund going forward.
We welcome your feedback on our approach. Please use our anonymous feedback form to share any questions, concerns or suggestions.
Read about the Round Three selection process (Previous round)
Why we are using randomisation
Our approach to introducing randomisation for the Essentials Fund is informed by extensive research conducted by Watershed Bristol and Jerwood Arts, and has been successfully implemented by organisations including Theatre Deli, The British Academy and New Diorama Theatre. You can read more about randomisation in arts funding in Random Selection: The How To Guide (2023).
By introducing randomisation, we can:
- Remove barriers by reducing unconscious bias from our selection process
- Divert more funds to artists by reducing assessment overheads
- Scale effectively to accommodate higher application volumes without increasing costs
- Simplify applications with fewer, shorter questions that respect your time
- Increase transparency about how selection decisions are made
- Improve diversity through representative quotas that address under-representation directly
How it works on Round Four
Round Four of the Essentials Fund introduces a two-phase process:
- An initial registration
- A full application for those shortlisted
Phase 1: Registration
All applicants complete a short Registration form with personal and eligibility information, including voluntary diversity monitoring data. There is no proposal or budget required at this stage. Diversity data is collected on a voluntary basis and can only ever work in your favour. there is no penalty for choosing not to disclose.
Phase 2: Shortlisting
From the Registration pool, 50 applicants will be invited to submit a full application. Applicants will be selected at random, while ensuring sufficient representation across all under-represented groups in line with our commitment to equity.
Phase 3: Application
Shortlisted applicants are invited to submit a full application, including their intended use of funds, anticipated impact and financial need.
Phase 4: Assessment and selection
All 50 applications are reviewed and scored internally against agreed criteria. Awards are made in order of score. In the event that more applications meet our quality threshold than we have places available, all of those who scored on the threshold will be entered into a draw to be selected at random.
Phase 5: Outcomes
All shortlisted applicants will be notified of the outcome, and informed whether any unsuccessful outcome was the result of the shortlisting stage or the assessment stage.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should I still put effort into my application?
Yes. Unlike Round Three, your full application will be read and scored by our team. The quality of your proposal, the clarity of your need, and how you plan to use the funds will all count towards your score.
What if I'm not selected at the shortlisting stage?
The shortlisting draw is random, so not being selected at this stage says nothing about the quality of your work or your eligibility. We encourage you to apply again in a future round.
What if I submit a strong application but am not awarded?
If more applications meet our quality threshold than we have places available, a random draw will be used to make the final selection from that high-scoring group. In this case, not being selected does not mean your application was insufficient, it means you were part of a strong pool and were not drawn. We will let you know which stage you were unsuccessful at.
What is positive action?
Positive action refers to proportionate steps taken to address under-representation, and is expressly permitted under the Equality Act 2010. In our process, no one is excluded on the basis of any characteristic, we simply give applicants from under-represented groups a proportionally higher chance of being shortlisted where our data shows a significant gap. Diversity data is voluntary and can only ever work in your favour.
Read more about our Fair Access Principles
Read more about our Equity, Inclusion and Diversity
What if I choose not to share my diversity data?
That is entirely your choice and will not count against you. However, sharing this information allows us to build a more representative shortlist and to understand who we are and are not reaching, which helps us improve the fund for everyone.
Does this devalue the award?
We don't think so. Round Four combines the fairness benefits of randomisation with the rigour of assessment, so recipients are both deserving and selected through a transparent, bias-reduced process.
Is this approach legal?
Yes. This process complies with UK charity law and the Equality Act 2010. Applications are free, eligibility criteria apply throughout, and the positive action mechanism is proportionate and evidence-based.
You can read more about randomisation in arts funding in Random Selection: The How To Guide (2023). 
Questions and feedback
We are piloting this approach across Rounds Three and Four of the Essentials Fund and will document our learning carefully at each stage. We are committed to being transparent about what works, what doesn't, and how we refine our approach over time.
We welcome your feedback. If you have questions, concerns, or suggestions about this approach. Please use our anonymous feedback form below or email our Head of Programmes, Laonikos Psimikakis Chalkokondylis (Laonikos.PC@SoundandMusic.org)