1.12.2011 hlf evaluation of landscape partnership programmePresentation Transcript
About the HLF/ LPS LPs for AONB funding - benefits (& limitations) Good practice in bids/ delivery & the LP future Evaluation?
HLF funding programmesGeneral programmes• Heritage Grants – £50k to £5m & upwards• Your Heritage – £3k to £50kTargeted programmes• Young Roots - £3k to £25k• Townscape Heritage Initiative – £500k to £2m• Landscape Partnerships - £250k to £2m• Parks for People - £250k to £5m (in Eng with BIG)Plus:Skills for the Future (£100k to £1m); Repair grants for Places of Worship (£10k to £250k); Catalyst Endowments (£30m match with DCMS)
Landscape Partnerships - features: Aims• £250k to £2m • Conserve & restore built and• Area 20 km² to 200 natural features km² • ^ community participation in• ‘Distinctive’ lscp local heritage character • ^ access to and learning• Partnerships – LA, about lscp & heritage NGO, NDPB &c • ^ training opportunities in local• Multi project heritage skills• Match funding ≥ 5% (was 10%) ≤ £1m; ≥ 10% (was 25%) for > £1m grant
Landscape Partnerships – process• Pre-application form• First-round applications in by 28th February• Case Officer assessment; Annual decision at July Trustees Board• Up to £100k in development funding• Development phase up to 12-18 months• To produce a Landscape Conservation Action Plan• 2nd round submission non–competitive, to Cntry/Reg C’tees,• HLF mentor/ monitor• Mid-term and final reports• Qualitative and quantitative evaluation
Lead bodies of landscape partnership and area scheme by number of schemes and percentage of totalNumbers (left) and area covered(right) by landscape partnership andarea schemes in protectedlandscapes
• Sperrins • Lagan Valley AONBs with LPs (or ASs) & • (August 2011) 7/11 Nortumberland Coast• Arnside and Silverdale 20/ 59; 14/45 (Lindisfarne)• Blackdown Hills (Neroche) • Arnside & Silverdale• Chichester Harbour (Rhythms of Tide) (Morecambe Bay)• Clwydian Range (Heather and Hillforts) • Gower• Caring for the Cotswolds • Dorset (S Dorset Ridgeway)• Dedham Vale/ Stour Valley • Shropshire Hills (Stiperstones and Corndon Hill )• Dorset (Carving a Foundation/ Purbeck Keystone Project) • Suffolk Coast and Heaths• High Weald (Weald Forest Ridge) (Suffolk Heritage Coast)• Isle of Wight (West Wight/ Eyes of the Needles) • North Pennines (Lower• Kent Downs x 2 (Medway Gap Valley of Vision‘ & White Derwent Valley) Cliffs)• Llyn Peninsula (Partneriaeth Tirlun Llyn/ Living on the View)• Malvern Hills• Mourne (Mountain Kingdom)• North Pennines x 2 (Unique/ Living NP & Heart of Teesdale/ Barnard Castle Vision• Shropshire Hills (Blue Remembered Hills)• Solway Coast (Sule Way/ Solway Wetlands)• South Devon (Life into Landscape)• Wye Valley
DHH STO MED WFR£1,813,000
HLF LPS as AONB funding? Congruent with AONB purposes & challenges• Natural and cultural heritage• Landscape ‘character’ (NB not nec’y ‘eminent’ & care about LCA)• For and with people• Social and economic well-being (training/ community plans?)• Partnerships (NB LP ≠ JAC)• NB HLF not just LPs – Heritage Grants may be more appropriate if specific biodiversity/ artefact project to deliver
Heritage Grants programme… • Conserve heritage, engage people • £50k to £5m & up • Rolling programme, < £5m apply anytime • 3 month assessment period • Two round competitive process • Development funding available • £50k - £1m Cntry/Reg C’tees (Jun, Sep, Dec, Mar) • £1m - £5m Trustees – 6x p.a. (>£5m via C/R team) • ≥ 5% match funding (was 10%) ≤ £1m grant • ≥ 10% (was 25%) match funding for > £1m grant
S, 0 & LP future W&T• Landscape ‘in’ – ELC (& • Up-front investment – failure on biodiversity • Partnership (arms length?) targets) and proposal development• ‘Big Society’ & localism • Financial uncertainty &• Lawton, NEWP, IBDAs, match funding NIAs and LNPs • Scale of funding/ ‘balance’• Multi-project ‘fill the gaps’ & ‘flaky’ projects? in AONB activity? • Exit strategies – what• Landscape character – after? beyond NEWP • M & E a pain?• Success rate > 50% • Need a good project• LPs to continue 2013 – manager – who stays to 2019 SP4 strategy May 2012 the end!
What makes a good application?• Clear, concise & well written – follows guidance• Clearly defined boundary/ies to area(s)• Clear vision and proven need for scheme• Strong partnership reflecting all interests• Robust project management structure• ‘Offers good vfm - no CDs/ DVDs! Need ‘value added’ not just delivery of AONB MP objectives• Outreach’ – new heritage categories/ audiences/ local engagement• Likelihood of sustained benefits - what happens after?
3 points ? • ‘Synergy’ - LPs are HLF’s ‘flagship’ programme - multi-purpose, multi-project, multi-partner, just like AONBs. AONBs important to HLF as a dependable delivery base. • ‘Outreach’ - beyond the AONB MP. LPs mean new heritage categories/ audiences/ local engagement. How could a Landscape Partnership and Scheme (re) invigorate the AONB? • ‘Sharing’ - lots of experience amongst AONBs – need to identify and share best practice! ( PS & get a good project team, early, & keep them)
Links – HLF LP Guidance: • Guidance • Pre-application and Application forms • 1st & 2nd round Help Notes All at: http://www.hlf.org.uk/HowToApply/programmes/ Pages/landscapepartnerships.aspx
Links – CEPAR HLF LP Evaluation: • Summary and Full reports plus appendices: At http://www.hlf.org.uk/aboutus/howwework/Pages/ LandscapePartnershipsevaluation.aspx And together with Appendices • Lists of LP and Area Schemes • Supplementary Guidance on LP Evaluation • Basic & Output Data from LP Schemes on the CEPAR webpages at http://www.bbk.ac.uk/environment/lps Username: HLF123, Password: LPS123
Downsides of Landscape and Partnership working
Evaluation tips• Start early – work out the story of your project• Take ownership of your evaluation• Define objectives, outputs and expected outcomes• Select indicators that will show progress towards outcomes – not just easiest measures or counting for counting’s sake• Involve people• Collect quantitative and qualitative evidence• Monitor continuously and consistently throughout the project• Collect final data
Participative M & EOutput monitoring• Integrate with schemedelivery (LCAP, mid-delivery, Final Report)• Standard data categories/ Outcome evaluationcodes – across HLF programme/ integrate • Workshops – regional, as well as newwith national datasets? schemes?• Baseline data? When, who, from • M & E need to be embedded inwhere? project planning & delivery• GIS – shape files and spatial • Incorporated in LCAP – a guide toanalysis action and delivery • Actioned with partners • Final Report to address legacy as well as achievement