October 2019

• Requester sought information on the grant allocation and the costs associated with The Church of the Holy Cross, Caston project. This information was provided and section 7 of the application form.
• Requester sought information on a recently commissioned report by the Heritage Fund on Folkestone Museum. This information was withheld under s.41 of the Freedom of Information Action (FOIA), provided in confidence.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the application form for the Wimbledon and Putney Commons project. The application was published by the grantee and the requester was directed to the relevant website.
• Requester sought information on the future funding plan for Islington Mill project. The requester was directed to our main organisation contact as we hold no information.
• Requester sought information on the future funding plan for Islington Mill project. The requester was directed to our main organisation contact as we hold no information.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on agreements with project partners, project plan, and letters of support for The Liverpool Athenaeum Library project. The project plan and three letters of support were provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA. The Heritage Fund did not hold any information on agreements with project partners.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information relating to expenditure, for the path for disable access at The Church of the Holy Cross, Caston project, and whether grantees have to provide actual expenditure figures . This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on our companies intranet. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the name of the person who submitted the application for the St. James, Hebden Bridge project. This information was withheld under s.40 of the FOIA, personal information.
• Requester sought information on our companies intranet. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on data showing grants for WW1 Then and Now, and number of applicants per region. This information was provided.

November 2019

• Requester sought information on the funding and grant details of the Upland Skies project. Sections 2 to 4 of the application form was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on our IT Service Management. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the application guidance for WWI Then and Now projects. The application guidance and approximate process time was provided.
• Requester sought information on the amount of money awarded to places of worship from 2018 to 2019. This information was withheld under s.22 of the FOIA, intended for future publication.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the cost breakdown for the Holy Cross, Catson project. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the application form for the Lake Vyrnwy Experience project. Sections 2–4 of the application form was provided.
• Requester sought the application form and reason that the grant was rejected for the Rona Sailing Project Archive. Sections 1–2 of the application form and reasons for rejection was provided, with personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought application form and the reason that the grant was awarded for the Rita Keegan Archive project. Sections 2–3 of the application form reasons for the award was provided, with personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA. Requester sought information on the application form and case paper for the Natural History Museum Urban Nature project. This information was provided with information redacted under s.40, 43(2) and 22 of the FOIA, personal information, commercial interest and intended for future publication respectively.
• Requester sought information on the application form for the Repair and regeneration of St Michael's Church project and the Daily Bread project. Sections 2–4 of the application form was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA. The Daily Bread project had not submitted an application therefore it was a nil return on this part of the request.
• Requester sought information on the date that the Torre Abbey Museum project was notified of their grant rejection. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on use of personal devices at work. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on a letter of intent for the Hick’s Farm project. This was a nil return.
• Requester sought information on our communications and telephony networks. This information was provided.

December 2019

• Follow up request. Requester sought information on how much the Lake Vyrnwy Experience project was awarded. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the cost breakdown for the Church of the Holy Cross, Caton project. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the full application form and decision meeting minutes for the Rita Keegan Archive project. The application form and case paper were provided, with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the full application form and decision meeting minutes for the Rona Sailing Project Archive. The application form and case paper were provided, with some personal information redacted under s.40 and information of commercial interest under s.43(2) of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on the terms of grant for the Inspiring People: Transforming Our National Portrait Gallery project. The contract was provided, with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA. The approved purposes were withheld under s.43(2) of the FOIA, commercial interests.
• Requester sought information on the amount of military heritage focused projects that received funding in the last 15 years. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's telecoms and networks. This information was provided.

January 2020

• Requester sought information on the amount of spam emails that have been blocked in the last two years. This was a nil return.
• Requester sought information on the Information Governance of the Heritage Fund. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the evaluation report for the Roberts Park project. The requester was directed to Bradford City Council.
• Requester sought information on the application and business plan for the Revealing the Charterhouse project. The application form and business plan were provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's telecoms and networks systems. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the Repair and regeneration of St Michael's Church, Brampton Abbotts project. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on all delivery phase meeting notes, including progress reports submitted by Lewisham Council, the Heritage Fund's monitor progress forms and minutes of meetings for Beckenham Place Park from December 2016. This information was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA and r.12(3) of the EIR. Commercially sensitive information was also redacted under s.43(2) of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on how we make checks on funding expenditure specifically for the Windrush Cymru project. The requester was directed to the information in our receiving a grant guidance.
• Requester sought information on the amount of money awarded to cathedrals since 2008. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the grant conditions for the Mary Rose Trust project. This information was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on the application and internal correspondences to discuss the Manchester Museum South Asia Gallery project before its award. The application form, committee and board meeting minutes, and the case paper was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on applications for funding from Farley Hospital. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the Windrush Cymru project. Information on the two projects was provided and the requester was directed to the monitoring processes for each project.
• Requester sought information for the grant commitments for the last 3 years. The requester was directed towards our open data.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's telecoms and networks systems. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the Leamington Spa, Jephson & Mill Gardens project. This information was provided along with the standard terms of grant for the Parks for People programme.
• Requester sought information on The Leaves of Southwell: Where medieval stone meets living nature project. Sections 2-4 of the application form was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on funded projects in Northern Ireland, This information was provided along with a link to our open data.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's Digital Heritage services. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on correspondences with Farley Hospital since the 17 October 2017. The Heritage Fund could neither confirm nor deny whether we have had contact with Farley Hospital under s.40(5B) of the FOIA, personal information.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the grant conditions for the Mary Rose Museum grant. The project proposals from the grant increase request was provided.
• Requester sought information on the National Football Museum project. This information was provided.

February 2020

• Requester sought information on the activity plan for the Southwell Leaves project. This information was provided, along with the contact details of the organisation for future correspondence, with some personal information was redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on the project outcomes of four projects. This information was not provided under s.21 of the FOIA, information accessible elsewhere. However, links to each organisations website was provided.
• Requester sought information on correspondences, amount paid to the project and what they were for, and copies of the plans and reports for the Temple Newsam House, Park and Garden project. Sections 2-3 of the application form, communications between The Heritage Fund and Leeds City Council, the project plan, and the permission to start form were all provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on The Football Museum project application form. The application form was provided with some personal information redacted under s.40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on an expression of interest from the National Museum of the Royal Navy, Portsmouth. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on The National Heritage Memorial Fund’s catering contracts. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's catering contracts. This information was provided.
• Requester asked the Heritage Fund to confirm we held a report relating to lake safety relating to the Beckenham Place Park project, and if so to supply that report. The request was refused under regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR, manifestly unreasonable.
• Requester sought information on the application form for the From Miner to Major project. Sections 2-4 of the application form was provided.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's Oracle or SAP ERP Solutions. The Heritage Fund does not use either of these solutions therefore it was a nil return on their request.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund's Information Technology. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on The National Heritage Memorial Fund’s Information Technology. This information was provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the Expression of Interest in regards to Hick’s Farm in Throop. This information was withheld under section 43(2) of the FOIA, commercial interests.
• Requester sought information on the National Museum of the Royal Navy, Portsmouth, project. The Expression of Interest and Application forms were provided with personal information redacted under s. 40 of the FOIA and some redactions made under s. 43(2) of the FOIA, Commercial Interests.

March 2020

• Requester sought information on sought information on the evaluation report for the Haverfordwest THI 1 project. This information was provided with personal information redact under s. 40 of the FOIA.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on funding on capercaillie conservation. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on documents received and generated for the Harwich Society’s project application and information in connection with the requesters initial complaint to The Heritage Fund. The application form, case paper for the project, and emails connected with the complaint were released with personal information redacted under s. 40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund’s energy usage. This information was withheld under s. 21 of the FOIA, information accessible elsewhere, and the requester was directed to our website.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund’s telephone system maintenance contract. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on the grant conditions for the ‘Celebration of Timber Buildings - Old Llanidloes Market Hall’ project. This information had been destroyed as per our retention schedule.
• Requester sought information on The Collection, Lincoln project. The award amount and the date of award was provided and the requester was also directed towards our standard terms of grant.
• Requester sought information on the committee reasoning for not funding the Leyton Sports Ground project. The committee meeting minutes were provided.
• Follow up request. Requester sought information on the submitted forms for the rejected grant, submitted forms for the submitted forms for the awarded grant, and correspondences for the grant, all in relation to the Colyton Parish History Society project. This information was provided with personal information redacted under s. 40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on two separate project contracts, both relating to Gayle Mill, North Yorkshire. This information was provided with personal information redacted under s. 40 of the FOIA.
• Requester sought information on the Heritage Fund’s Microsoft Office 365 Backup Policy. This information was provided.
• Requester sought information on correspondence of the Beverley Minster project,  and their application, and a SAR request. This information was provided with personal information redacted under s. 40 of the FOIA and some redactions under s. 43(2) of the FOIA, commercial interests.
• Requester sought information on a recent application from the National Justice Museum. We did not have any relevant information for the requester and directed the requester instead to the organisation.