Join mailing list

Finance Section

AcadMathSci Consultation Document

11. Finance 

Academy Budget

11.1 As part of discussions so far, an illustrative organisation structure and staffing model have been developed that will enable the Academy to carry out its proposed activities. We have considered three scenarios:

  1. A minimum viable structure which represents broadly the minimum staffing level that the Academy would realistically need to have in order to be able to operate with sufficient impact; and
  2. A fully-fledged structure, the structure the Academy might aim towards a few years following launch.
  3. A full structure which assumes greater availability of funding and where increased funding and activity is expected to yield still significantly greater benefits

11.2 We have modelled the likely costs of running the Academy based on these two structures. This suggests an annual budget of at least £2m would be required for the minimum viable structure. A budget of £4m per annum would enable the Academy to operate the full structure. Funds will need to be raised to pay for these – and the availability of funds will determine the extent of what the Academy can do.

11.3 In specifying the structures we have looked at some other organisations and assumed:

  1. Core capabilities in Policy & Advocacy, Comms, Fundraising, Finance, and EDI;
  2. Policy Unit as set out in the Policy section, growing and expected to include Education, Practitioners and Innovators / Implementation of Mathematical Sciences, and Academic Affairs;
  3. Director of EDI to embed EDI into the mission of the academy and across AcadMathSci activities;
  4. Operations Department responsible for operation functions, supported by Secretariat and Finance managers;
  5. Trustees and Fellows to be supported by dedicated secretariat roles;
  6. IT and Legal functions outsourced.

11.4 The largest cost is expected to be for staff salaries. Illustrative work so far implies around 17 staff in the minimum viable case rising to around 30 for the fully-fledged structure. Premises are potentially the second largest cost, although there are a range of options here, from a largely remote working approach to the cost of full market rent for a central London building. No decisions have yet been made either on the need for premises or on location. 

11.5 The Development and Finance workstream is exploring a number of possible avenues for funding the Academy. These include individual philanthropists; corporations; charities; and Government. 

Supporters

11.6 In order to build a strong case to prospective donors and funders, the working group has been assembling a list of distinguished mathematical scientists, scientists and prominent individuals who are happy publicly to pledge their support for the Academy. We have identified those we wish to approach to join this group and have already started to contact them, with some encouraging success so far. We are deliberately aiming for a group that is broad in composition (our list includes educators, business people, and TV personalities etc.) with the common link being their interest in mathematics and support for the goals of the Academy.

11.7 Engagement with potential donors will be intensified once this consultation exercise has concluded, plans for the Academy have been firmed up, and a strong base of support has been established.

 

Question

Q29. This section has set out expected activities (in terms of what people hired do in similar organisations); a range of costings; and possible sources of funds. Do you have any comments on whether we are missing any activities that the Academy should pursue; or activities in the list that you think the Academy should not carry out? Are we right to look at all these sources of funds?