PP SD no 8 Evaluation plan

Stage 2 HLF submission - February 2015
Peel Park
Evaluation plan
PP-13-06497

1
Contents
1. Introduction
2. What is Evaluation?
3. Selection of Outcomes
4. Indicators
5. The Baseline Data
6. Targets
7. Methods
8. Telling the Story; Reporting the results
9. A Programme for Evaluation
10. Resources
Appendices
A. Evaluation Framework :
B. Information Required for Evaluation
C.People Counter Instructions;
D.People Counter results August 2014 to January 2015
E. Mock Green Flag Assessment 2013
F. Fixed point photographs;
G.Resident/Visitor Survey Sample Questions
H.Summary of Results of Visitor and Resident Survey 2013
I. Summary of Results of Student Survey November 2014
J. Summary of results of surveys at events
K. Contacts

2
1. Introduction
1.1 Peel Park in Salford is one of the nation’s earliest examples of an urban public park. It
was designed, constructed and opened in 1846 to provide unrestricted recreational
space to all classes of society. The park later became the location for the Museum,
Library and Art Gallery which again pioneered free access to all classes of society.
Later still it was the site of the Technical College which formed the basis of the
University of Salford.
1.2 The historic core of the park itself is 10 hectares in extent. Combined with the adjacent
David Lewis Playing Fields and Crescent Meadow it is the largest green spaces in the
city and there are nearly 30000 people living within 1.2km of it. It is located next to the
Peel Park Campus of the University of Salford and close to an area of major
regeneration activity on Chapel Street.
1.3 Over recent years Peel Park has suffered from a reduced maintenance programme
and limited investment. Many of its heritage features have been removed over the past
century and there are issues surrounding access, security and visibility which have
limited its use. However, there is still a lot of local pride in the park and a friends group
has recently been formed to support its restoration1
.
1.4 Salford City Council working with the Friends of Peel Park intends to restore the most
historic part of Peel Park. Salford City Council has received a development grant from
the Heritage Lottery Fund and is now developing the Stage 2 submission to the HLF
for Parks for People funding. The council aims to undertake physical improvements to
the park which will include the restoration of some of the original features. In addition
to the capital works, a programme of activities and events is planned to encourage a
wider range of people to visit the park.

1.5 Part of the HLF bid is for a new park-based ‘Park Keeper’ post for five years, who will
manage the programme of activities and training along with ensuring that the
maintenance of the park is carried out to a high quality. They will also work with and
support the Friends Group as well as co-ordinate volunteering. The Park Keeper will
also play a major role in evaluating the benefits of the project on the users of the park
and the local community. This Plan is intended not only to support the bid but also to
act as a guide to the Park Keeper on the requirement of evaluating the project
2. What is Evaluation?
2.1 In its guidance on evaluating Parks for People projects the Heritage Lottery Fund
defines evaluation as:
1
Friends of Peel Park www/friendsofpeelpark.co.uk

3
“A process of thinking back in a structured way on what has worked and why as
your project progresses and reaches completion2
”
2.2 Evaluation is required to assess whether the project is achieving the goals of both the
Heritage Lottery Fund and the Council. The Heritage Lottery Fund requires that
investment in the project has contributed to the overall aims of the Heritage Lottery
Fund and the Parks for People programme. This is not only a matter of the amount of
money spent on restoration of features or the number of activities but ensuring that
the funding has made a real difference to people’s lives and given them a greater
appreciation of the historical significance of the park. Similarly, Salford City Council
has to ascertain whether its investment in the park is achieving its own aims and
benefitting both local communities and the city.
2.3 The process of evaluation requires the collection and analysis of statistics, costs and
incomes but to provide a complete picture it is necessary to “tell the story” of the
project and the difference it has made to people’s lives. This can be done through
statistics but it has more impact if individuals involved in the project record their own
impressions experiences likes and dislikes, for example by narrative, photographs
and painting or by film.
2.4 Information is of two types:
• Outputs; the actual intervention in terms of physical changes to the park (area
of landscape created, number of events and what happened at events).
• Outcomes; the impact the project as a whole has on the park and the lives of
users and the neighbourhood.
Of the two categories, ‘Outcomes’ are the most significant; there is little point in
carrying out a project if it cannot be shown to have in some way improved people’s
lives.
3 Selection of Outcomes
3.1 The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) specifies the type of Outputs that projects funded
through their grants should achieve:
1a The Park and its heritage will be better managed.
1b The Park and its heritage will be in better condition.
1c The heritage of the park will be identified and recorded.
1d The heritage of the park will be better interpreted and explained
2a People will have developed skills.
2b People will have learnt about heritage.
2c People will have volunteered time.
3a The local community will be a better place to live, work or visit.
2
Heritage Lottery Fund Evaluation Guidance Parks for People March 2014 Part 1

4
3b Negative environmental impacts will be reduced.
3c More people and a wider range of people will have engaged with heritage3
Effectively, they represent what the HLF require the project to achieve. The
Outcomes have been incorporated into the Evaluation Framework which sets the
targets for the project (see Appendix A).
3.2 The Stage One bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund and the supporting document
submitted by Salford City Council in August 2013 set a specific vision and objectives
for the restoration of Peel Park. In effect these provide a set of outcomes for this
particular project: “What we say we will achieve in Peel Park.” These broadly
correspond to the outputs specified by the HLF as indicated in Appendix A. In
summary these are:

Vision
“To create an attractive, well used park for 21st century living providing a place
for enjoyment, inspiration, reflection and a source of local pride”
Aims
• Restore Peel Park, as far as possible, to the structure of 1890, reintroducing
some of its historic features while improving the public facilities required by
today’s park users.
• Create a city park for Salford providing a high quality green space for all
visitors.
• Preserve and enhance an important part of Salford’s heritage and social history
for the enjoyment and education of future generations.
• Restore a venue for small scale cultural activities attracting visitors from all
sections of the city.
• Enable better understanding of an important part of Salford’s heritage and
social history.
• Ensure that the park is safe and accessible to all.
• Encourage greater use of the park by providing a diverse range of activities.
• Re-establish the links between recreation and learning through activities and
links with the Salford Museum and Art Gallery.
• Celebrate the role the park has played in the life of the city.
• Enrich the delivery of educational programmes by use of the park by schools,
colleges and the University for study and recreation.
• Improve the city’s cultural offer, benefiting users from across the city.
• Ensure all development is sustainable in terms of management and
maintenance.
• Strengthen the links with the park users and community and make this once
again “A Park for the People.”
3
Evaluation Guidance for Parks for People March 2014 Figure 1

5
• Encourage better community involvement in the development, management
and maintenance of the park, through programme of events, training and
education4
.
4. Indicators
4.1 To show in an objective fashion how outcomes have been achieved, indicators which
can be measured are required. In its Monitoring Data Reporting Sheet for Parks for
People the Heritage Lottery Fund gives a range of indicators for each required
outcome. Parks for People funding is a national scheme which supports a wide variety
of public open spaces. Therefore the Parks for People Monitoring return provide a
range of mandatory indicators to show how the project is performing against key
outputs while other indicators are optional. These can be selected depending on the
particular circumstances of the project (shown in italics on the monitoring form).
Additionally there is an open question which can be to show how the difference the
project has made to people’s lives.
4.2 Peel Park is an urban park but unlike many similar parks it has no residential areas
directly associated with it. Although it is nationally significant in the history of public
parks it has relatively few historic structures. It is therefore proposed that data is not
collected for the following optional indicators:
• Number of buildings to be brought back into active use; there are no buildings
within the park
• Buildings or features removed from the “at risk” register; there are no buildings
or features on the “At Risk Register” maintained by English Heritage
• Areas of wetland protected or created; the landscape plan prepared for stage 2
does not incorporate wetlands.
• Areas of woodland protected or created; there are no areas of woodland within
the park.
• Area of water bodies protected or created; there are no water bodies in the park
and it is not proposed to create any
• Areas of coastal or marine habitat protected or created; the park is inland.
• Volunteering activities: retail. It is not anticipated there will be retail
opportunities in the park.
• Number of specific species projects. No species specific projects are proposed
in the Activities Plan.
5 The Baseline Data
5.1 Indicators need to be tested against the situation as it was before the project started;
“The Baseline”. This information is normally collected at the Development Stage
4
Peel Park Heritage Lottery Fund Bid 2013 Parks for People Programme Supporting Document Page 43

6
although in the case of Peel Park a lot of information was collected before the stage
one application was submitted through:
• A mock Green Flag assessment carried out in 2013 (see Appendix E).
• Visitor survey carried out in 2013 (see Appendix H).
• Survey of residents within 1.2km of the park 2013 (see Appendix H)
The results have been incorporated into the Evaluation Framework (Appendix A).
5.2 The number of visitors is automatically counted by people counters sited at the
busiest entrances in 2014. Extrapolation of the results from the people counters
suggests that the annual number of visitors to the park is 55000. This is higher than
the initial estimate and has resulted in the target number of users being raised.
Results from the surveys of users and the fact that there are morning and afternoon
peaks in visitors suggests most of these are passing through the park rather than
lingering (see Appendix H). An Observation Study (see paragraph 7.5) would help
more accurately determine where visitors go in the park and which entrances they
use.
5.3 The Green Flag Award Scheme is a national benchmark for parks and green spaces
managed by a consortium of Keep Britain Tidy, British Trust for Conservation
Volunteers and Greenspace. Parks are assessed by independent judges on the basis
of eight criteria:
• Whether it is a welcoming place?
• Whether it feels healthy, safe and secure?
• How clean and well maintained it is?
• Is it maintained in a sustainable fashion?
• Are conservation and heritage features well managed?
• The extent of Community involvement in its management?
• The marketing of the park.
• The Management Plan.
The pass score is 42. A mock assessment was carried out in January 2013. Peel Park
scored 33 but the assessment gave a useful objective summary of the faults of the
park and what could be done to remedy them (see Appendix E):
5.4 A residents and visitor survey interviewed 90 people within the park and 438 in face to
face interviews in the area surrounding the park during the summer of 2013. Questions
were based on the Annual Parks for People monitoring return and the results were
compared to the broader population of the area (from the 2011 census). The survey
also collected people’s views on the park and how it could be improved. A summary of
the results are given in Appendix H.
5.5 Out of resident interviewed, 73% had visited the park once in the last year. The park
was valued for its tranquillity and greenery in an urban area. Most visitors were from

7
local postcodes suggesting that the park operates as a neighbourhood park rather
than a city park.
5.6 The condition of the park and difficulties in finding and accessing the park were the
main reasons for not visiting. There is a feeling that the Park is isolated, poorly signed,
and poorly serviced. Some residents are unsure who it belongs to and whether they
could use it (due to its proximity to the University of Salford campus). A comparison of
the age profile of users and that of the City of Salford and the local area suggests that
under-25s are under-represented amongst user (despite the proximity of the University
and the growth of a younger population in Salford). Non-white British residents were
also underrepresented amongst the users although Salford is becoming increasingly
ethnically diverse and the University attracts a large number of foreign students. There
is also under representation of people with disabilities in an area where 11% of the
population have a disability that limits their day to day activity. The on-site disabled
parking and access proposed may help increase use by the disabled.
5.7 Situated as it is, students are likely to be major users of Peel Park. A survey was
conducted in November 2014 by interviewing students in the Peel Park Campus
(nearest the park). This used the same survey questions as the residents and visitor
survey. The majority of students interviewed never or rarely visited the park; the main
reason was a reputation as being unsafe and the lack of any real need to go there.
Visits were short; most were for 30 minutes or less. Like the general public the park
was appreciated as a green space in a mainly built up area (see Appendix I).
5.8 The Council holds regular events in the parks. A small sample of visitors attending
these events is interviewed mainly to find their views about the event. Surveys were
carried out at three events in 2013 and in 2014 (see Appendix J). Most visitors were
first-time visitors to the park but they lived locally and found out about the event by
‘word of mouth.’ Not surprisingly, given the nature of events most interviewed were
young families and no one was aged over 60. The main factor deterring repeat visits
were the lack of facilities, supervision and maintenance of the park. The events
themselves were popular and attracted 1842 people.
5.9 Increased numbers of volunteers will play an important part in the management and
maintenance of the park and a record was kept of numbers attending events. Nine
volunteer maintenance sessions have been held in the park in 2014 and attracted 39
volunteers. The majority of the baseline figure for volunteering in 2014 have been the
activities of the Friends group. In total 513 hours were contributed to the development
of the bid. Members of the friends group have also visited events to promote the park.
5.10 A series of photographs from fixed points within the park were taken during the
summer of 2014 as a record of the park before restoration took place (see Appendix
F). The evaluation programme in Chapter 8 requires further photographs to be taken

8
from these points throughout the life of the project. This is in addition to other
photographic activities within the park.
6 Targets
6.1 The Heritage Lottery Fund requires that targets be set against the selected indicators.
The HLF sets few specific targets, the main one being that improvements to managing
your park or cemetery will mean that the park can attain a Green Flag Award with a
high level pass mark. Generally the indicators in Peel Park which are assessed by a
Green Flag score will aim for particular aspects to achieve a minimum standard of
“Good” in the assessment.
6.2 The applicant has therefore to set their own targets. Those for indicators which relate
to the demography of visitors have been set to reflect the population of Salford as a
whole, as at the 2011 census. This reflects the aim that it should be once again a city
park attracting visitors from across the city. However, events and activities may attract
attendees from a wider area and the demographic characteristics of the population
within the Manchester post code area have been used to set the targets for events.
Conversely, volunteers may be expected to be more local in origin and the Evaluation
Framework aims to match the characteristics of the local population i.e. within 1.2 km
of the park. As the scheme progresses particular groups may be found to be under-
represented in activities. If this is the case targets may need to be adjusted and
activities to attract those groups developed.
6.3 An additional target has been added for volunteers undertaking historical research
(Appendix A ref 7). This reflects the importance of interpreting and explaining the
history and role of the park through archives and reminiscences.
6.4 Targets for the opinion of visitors have been derived from the survey carried out in
2013. The targets require a significant increase in the number of visitors viewing the
park positively. Thus for the Indicator of “overall visitor satisfaction” should increase
from 73% in the 2013 survey to 90% after completion of works (Outcome 1 in
Appendix A).
6.5 Other targets such as the number of facilities provided and the nature of activities are
derived from other bid documents, notably the landscape plan and the Activities Plan.
6.6 The targets can be reviewed to reflect changing circumstances but any changes will
be to be justified using the results of evaluation.

9
7 Methods
A. Visitor Numbers
7.1 Measurement of visitor numbers into the park is made difficult by the lack of
boundaries and numerous entrances. Basic information on the number of visitors to
the park is provided by two People Counters which respond to the body heat of
visitors passing within 3 metres. These are housed in steel posts at the busiest
entrances to the parks. Numbers are recorded automatically by day, month and year
but it is suggested that they are downloaded to a laptop and analysed monthly. The
basic analysis should identify how the number of visitors varies by day of the week
and hour of the day but this could be extended to study the effect of the weather,
season and any events being held in the park, at the Museum and Art Gallery or at
the University.
7.2 The location of the people counter was determined by a “Calibration Survey” carried
out on a midweek day in May 2014. This indicated the busiest entrances to the park.
They also recorded the number entering and leaving at each location and basic
information about visitors, cyclist (mounted and dismounted) and pedestrians’ age
and sex. The calibration survey has been cautiously used to extrapolate the basic
information from the people counters to give an indication of entering and leaving the
park by different entrances (although this is not a substitute for visitor surveys).
Appendix C gives more details of the People Counters. Appendix D gives the results
for the first six months of their use.
7.3 The location and use of entrances into the park is likely to change over the life of the
project, particularly with the completion of the student village to the north of the park
in 2015. It is also possible that the identity of visitors to the park will change. It is
therefore suggested that a further calibration survey is carried out after the student
village has been open for a year in 2016 and after the physical works have been
carried out to the park. Surveys should be carried out mid week and in term time. The
People Counters should be retained and data analysed for the life of the project.
However, at least one recorder may need to be relocated if the location of the busiest
entrance changes.
7.4 One of the ambitions of the project is to provide digital interpretation of the history
and features of the park. It will also be necessary to record the number of hits on the
park website together with the number of times guides or apps associated with the
park have been downloaded. The means to record of this data will be a necessary
part of the design of websites and applications.
B. Green Flag Assessment
7.5 A key target is achieving and maintaining the Green Flag status. Green Flag awards
are the benchmark national standard for parks and green spaces in the UK. Parks
are assessed by independent judges using accompanied and unaccompanied visits.

10
Applications for assessment must be made annually by the end of January with a
decision in July. Analysis of the Green Flag assessment can provide useful
information for the evaluation of a range of targets and a record should be kept of the
scores in each of the criteria outlined in paragraph 5.3. It is suggested that an initial
application is submitted once capital works in the parks are completed and then
made annually. The Green Flag award must be obtained for a minimum of seven
consecutive years.
C. Surveys
7.6 The success of the Parks for People funding is measured by the beneficial impact
this has on users of the park and local people. The obvious way of obtaining this
information is by survey. Face to face interviews using standard survey forms were
effective at the pre-application stage in capturing the views of both visitors to the park
and residents within 1.2km of the park in a single survey. The Broughton Trust
community enterprise was used to carry out these surveys. This is based in the area
around the park and employed local people to do the survey (which may have
generated a higher response rate than bringing in outside survey companies).
Demographic information was also collected and analysed to determine whether
respondents match the general population profile from the 2011 Census. These
surveys are expensive to run and cannot be used every year. It is suggested that one
is run towards the end of the project period. These could be supplemented by
additional surveys of park users by volunteers such as;
• Visitor surveys; either face to face interviews or using postal or online
questionnaires, will help helping understand where visitors are coming from, what
they do in the park and their suggestions for how the park and their experience of
if it could be improved
• Observation surveys allow an estimate of how many visits are being made to a
park, the type of people who are and are not visiting, the activities they engage in
and which parts of the park are well and less well used5.
• Targeted surveys to determine what particular groups want.
• School participation; numbers of pupils and staff and the activities carried out,
together with feedback on the success or otherwise of the activities.
• Activities such as performances, films and text could be used to record the impact
the park has had on people living in the area and how its restoration has affected
them.
Allowance has been made for volunteer expenses to run one or more additional
surveys.
D. Activities and Volunteering
7.7 Assessment is also needed of activities and volunteering. Obviously, a record needs
to be kept of the activities provided, together with broad estimates of numbers
attending. More detailed surveys by face to face interview are currently carried out by
5
This records the number, demography and activities of visitors to the park at a fixed frequency over a set period (for
examples see the Epping Forest surveys on the City of London website www.cityoflondon.gov)

11
Rangers and volunteers at events in Peel Park, mainly to gauge visitor satisfaction.
These should also identify who is attending events and how far they travel. There is
the risk that face to face interviews becoming too long, particularly at the end of
events and such surveys may need to be supplemented by other means e.g. postal
questionnaires (possibly linked to prize draws), or questionnaires attached to the sale
of tickets or request to join email lists.
7.8 A record will need to be kept of volunteers to collect basic demographic information.
The information only needs to be collected once for each volunteer but a record is
also needed of days worked by volunteers (a day is considered equivalent to seven
hours) and the activity they are engaged in. Volunteer case studies (recording the
experience of individuals who volunteer) should also prove enlightening. This may be
done buy face to face interviews and also questionnaires. Case studies should
consider failures in volunteering (perhaps where volunteers cease to attend
sessions) as well as successes.
E. Other Evidence
7.9 The HLF also emphasises the need to “tell the story” of the project in a way which
mere statistics cannot provide. This will be particularly useful in highlighting
successes and difficulties in implementing the project and the actual difference it
makes to individuals. This would therefore require the recording of information on:
• Project management; project timetables (and performance against the
timetable), staffing issues, expenditure.
• Implementation including proposals, tenders and contracts and technical
issues
• The difference made to heritage; records of restoration of feature (principally
through before and after photographs), wildlife, memories, archive research
and discoveries interpretation and publications.
• The difference made to people; records of activities, key events, surveys,
correspondence.
7.10 A key historical reference has been the Park‘s Head Gardener’s Record Books
1874-1887 and the Annual; Report to the Park Committee 1846-1915. A similar
record and reporting system could be used to tell the story of the restoration of the
park through a ‘Park Keepers Daybook’. This would record events, (scheduled and
non-scheduled), volunteering, weather, correspondence and conversations. It should
tell of lessons learnt and possible solutions as well as achievements. It may be in the
form of a paper record or through social media. It may also include video,
photography and other media. However the information is recorded it should be in a
form which is retrievable for the final evaluation and future projects.
7.11 A summary of the methods for assessment is given in Appendix B.

12
8 Telling the Story; Reporting the results
8.1 Evaluation is required to prove that the project is achieving the goals of the Heritage
Lottery Fund and that investment in the project has contributed to the overall aims of
the Heritage Lottery Fund and the Parks for People programme. This is not only a
matter of money having been spent on restoration of features or the number of
activities but that the funding has made a real difference to people’s lives and given
them a greater appreciation of the historical significance of the park. Similarly Salford
City Council has to prove that its investment in the park is benefitting both local
communities and the city. Specifically, it has to prove that it has achieved the aims
for the project set out in paragraph 3.2
8.2 At the most basic level each Parks for People project informs the Heritage Lottery
Fund of its achievements in two ways;
• Annual Parks for People Monitoring Return; core data based on the outputs
given above
• At the end of the project an Evaluation Report which provides an evaluation of
what has been delivered and what overall impact the project has made.
8.3 The Parks for People Monitoring Return is made every February throughout the life
of the project. It covers each of the Parks for People outcomes (see paragraphs 1.2).
Projects are expected to collect and present targets and data relevant for their
project. Parts 4 and 5 of this Evaluation Plan and the Evaluation Framework
(Appendix A) show what indicators and targets the Peel Park Project Team propose
to measure for this return. Additionally, the returns seek qualitative information about
the impact the project has had on individuals, groups, the park itself or the wider
community in a 200-300 word “story”. The requirement for this annual return provides
the focal point for data collection and evaluation process.
8.4 At the end of the project the project team will produce a Project Evaluation Report
which demonstrates what has been achieved against all of the programme
outcomes. This means it is important that monitoring and evaluation is a continuous
process and that responsibility for this is clear at the start of the project to allow for
changes in staff etc. This will be done through this Plan but other plans produced in
the development phase will also contribute to baseline data and returns. It will also
require specific resources to be set aside throughout the life of the project to carry
out monitoring and evaluation (see Chapter 10).
8.5 Continuous evaluation of the project can also have wider benefits:
• Indicate whether the project has to adjust to changing circumstances and then
justify those changes.
• Surveys etc. are a way of engaging with users and local residents about the
park and better understanding their needs.

13
• Information from evaluation can help challenge assumptions. This is particularly
important in the case of Peel Park which is often assumed to be part of the
University campus.
• Provide lessons for other projects both within Salford and nationally.
• Progress against targets provides motivation and encouragement for the team.
• Provide a positive story for press and politicians.
8.6 The achievements and issues of the project will need to be reported to the managing
group, the Council and The Friends by the Park Keeper. A regular report is already
made to the Working Group (which consists of representatives of the Assistant
Mayors, ward Councillors, University and the Friends). This could continue through
the implementation of the project although responsibility for producing this would rest
with the Park Keeper. It would be informed by:
• Progress with the implementation of the project
• Feedback from activities and volunteering
• The ‘Park Keepers Daybook’ referred to in paragraph 7.10.
The monthly report could take the form of a newsletter, notices within the park for
users, blog and entries on the website/Facebook. It would also provide an
opportunity to raise issues.
8.7 An annual evaluation report for the managing group, City Mayor and corporate
directors in Salford City Council will be an opportunity to celebrate achievements and
identify issues with the management group, friends and representatives of users.
9. A Programme for Evaluation
9.1 Continuous evaluation of the project has many advantages and will be a key part of
the Park Keepers role (scrutinized by the managing group). This is best achieved
through a regular programme as set out below. Other tasks such as surveys can be
contracted out.
Daily a) Record weather, events and activities both within and
outside the park. This can be compared to the
numbers visiting the park taken from the monthly
download from people counters to identify the
reasons for variations in attendance (Outcome 10A in
Appendix A).
b) Park Keepers Daybook (Outcomes 2, 3, 5A, 10B in
Appendix A)
c) Update website, Facebook page and Twitter feed etc.
Monthly a) Download count from people counters. Extrapolate
numbers at each entrance entering and leaving and
other information from the Calibration survey

14
(Outcomes 10A).
b) Monthly report to managing group/Friends
Annual a) End of January. Application for Green Flag
Assessment (result in July). Informs Outcomes 1, 2,
5A, 5B, 8, 9 in Appendix A.
b) February. Parks for People Monitoring Data
Reporting Sheet including audit of progress of project
(e.g. number of facilities, historic structures restored
etc.)
c) January-March. Assessment of activities and school
visits in the previous year terms of numbers and
identity of attendees. If necessary revise targeting
with the Working Group/managing group
d) January-March. Decision about surveys in the next
financial year.
e) March. Annual Evaluation Report
9.2 Other evaluations will be undertaken on a more infrequent basis:
• Fixed point photography. As a minimum, carried out before works start, on
completion of capital works and at the end of the project (informs outcomes 4 and
6 in Evaluation Framework Appendix A). See Appendix F for locations.
• Peel Back Time study As a minimum, before works start, on completion of capital
works and at the end of the project with an exhibition towards the end of the
project. However this could also be an evolving feature on the parks
website/Facebook page. Informs outcomes 4 and 6 in Appendix A
• Survey of participation in activities and event; a sample survey should be carried
out for each event (Informs Outcomes 5A, 8, 10 in Evaluation Framework).
• Record of volunteering. Details of new volunteers should be recorded when they
first start. For each volunteering event a record should be kept of the type of
activity and the number of person-hours (number of people volunteering multiplied
by the number of hours spent on the activity). Outcomes 5B and 7
• Visitor Survey. As a minimum a full survey (based on the questions in Appendix G)
should be carried out towards the end of the project but other surveys could be
carried out by volunteers. Informs outcomes 1, 2, 4, 6, 10A.
• Residents survey As a minimum a sample of residents within 1.2km of the park (as
set out in the footnote to Appendix H) should be carried out towards the end of the
project. Informs Outcomes 1, 2, 4, 6, 10A.
• Stories about the Park. This may be in the form of historic information through
reminiscences, academic research or community archaeology projects. It may also
take the form of contemporary responses to restoration, activities and volunteering
recorded in the Park Keepers Daybook.

15
10 Resources
10.1 Much of the burden of the day to day evaluation will fall upon the Park Keeper. This
could be supplemented by volunteers carrying out some surveys. Volunteers may
not always be suitable for all surveys (for example, the Calibration Survey may
require professional surveyors because of the long hours required) Additionally, the
use of online surveys and postal questionnaire may help reduce the burden in certain
instances although it should be borne in mind that these are not always as effective
as face to face interviews. The tables below estimate the resources required for
evaluation through the life of the project :
Financial Cost over life of project
Development Stage
Item No.
Unit Cost
£ Total Cost Timing
People
Counter
Purchase 2 1,500.00 £ 3,000.00 2014
Calibration Survey
Initial Install 1 725.00 £ 725.00 2014
Installation 2 300.00 £ 600.00 2014
£ 4,325.00
Implementation Stage
People
Counter
2015-
2020
Calibration Surveys 2 775.00 £ 1550.00 2015-
2020
Relocation after
completion of Student
Village
1 300.00 £ 300.00 2016
Replacement Batteries 6 15.00 £ 90.00 2015-
2020
People Counters Total £ 1940.00
Surveys
Visitor Survey
(volunteer expenses)
1 500.00 £ 500.00 2017
Visitor and Resident
Surveys
1 4,500.00 £ 4500.00 2020
2015-
2020
Total Cost of Evaluation £ 6940.00
The Green Flag assessment is budgeted separately to the evaluation costs at
£1842 for six assessments
Estimated Staff Time (Primarily the Park Keeper) per year
Evaluation Activity (see
above)
Unit time Total Time per
year
Park Keepers Daybook 0.5 hrs per day ) 110 hrs

16
Monthly
Download and extrapolate count 3 hours per month 36 hrs
Monthly Report 7 hours per month 84 hrs
Annual
Application for Green Flag 7 hours 7 hours
Parks for People Monitoring
Data
7 hours 7 hours
Annual Evaluation Report 16 hours 16 hours
Annual Total 260 hours per year
plus 1 hour per
activity

17
Appendix A Peel Park Evaluation Framework
Ref- Aims for Peel
Park
Indicators Baseline Target Method Resources
1. HLF Output:- The park and its heritage will be better managed
Ensure all development
is sustainable in terms of
management and
maintenance.
Green Flag score overall 33 42 Plus Green Flag Assessment on
completion of works and
annually 2016-2020
£1842
Six assessments at
£307 each
Green Flag Score 10 litter
and waste management
4 “Poor” 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Green Flag Score 11
Grounds maintenance
and Horticulture
3 “Poor” 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Green Flag score 18
Arboriculture and
woodland management
4 “Poor” 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Green Flag Score 12
Building and Infrastructure
Maintenance
4 “Poor” 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Overall Visitor Satisfaction
with Park
73%6
90% Visitor and resident
Surveys
£5000
Survey 2020 £4500
Visitor Surveys £500
6
Very Satisfied or reasonably satisfied of visitors in 2013 survey

18
Ref- Aims Indicators Baseline Target Method for Evaluation Resources
2. HLF Output: Park and its heritage will be in a better condition
Preserve and enhance
an important part of
Salford’s heritage and
social history for the
enjoyment and
education of future
generations.
Restore Peel Park, as far
as possible, to the
structure of 1890,
reintroducing some of its
historic features while
improving the public
facilities required by
today’s park users. The
project will create a city
park for Salford and
providing a high quality
green space for all
visitors.
Green Flag Score; 8
Appropriate provision of
facilities
Green Flag Score; 9 Quality of
facilities
4 “Poor
5 “Fair”
” 7 plus
“Good” to
“Exceptional”
7 plus
“Good” to
“Exceptional”
Green Flag Assessment on
annually 2016-2022
£1842
Six assessments at
£307 each
Fixed Point Photography
(see Appendix E)
Volunteer time
(Photography Club)
& Park Keeper time
Green Flag Score; 21
Conservation of buildings and
structures
4 “Poor” 7 plus;
“Good” to
“Exceptional”
Green Flag Assessment on
annually 2016-2022
£1842
Six assessments at
£307 each
Number of facilities Play Area 57
Annual assessment of works
completed from contracts
and measured for Parks for
People Monitoring Data
sheet and Annual Report
Park Keeper Time
Volunteer Time
Repair/restoration of historic
features
0 58
Enhancement of Landscape
Features
0 69
Re-construction of lost
Features
0 410
Improvements to Infrastructure 0 911
Fixed Point Photography;
(see Appendix E)
Volunteer time
(Photography Club)
& Park Keeper timeArea of grassland protected or
created
33151sq.
m12
80389sq.
m13
% residents/visitors agreeing
park is in good condition
58% 85% Visitor and resident Surveys £9000;-Two surveys
at £4500 each
7
Play Area, Park Keeper Office, Disabled Parking, Event space, wifi
8
Refurbish steps and terrace, Restore historic paths, restore Flood Marker, events space on site of bandstand, restore formal bedding area
9
Woodland management to open up views and create events space, tree and shrub planting, resurfacing of paths and steps, creation of a "focal point" at confluence of paths,
species rich grassland on banks, selective bulb planting.
10
Historic paths recreated, recreation of formal bedding in historic core, opening up of park by selective woodland management including creation of event space around site of
bandstand.
11
3825m
2
Paths Improved/created, 11 new seats, 5 new bins, 17 refurbished lights , refurbished play area, Wifi, park keeper office, 2 refurbished steps, 3 disabled parking
12
Neutral semi improved grassland/amenity grassland. Preliminary Ecological Assessment by Urban Green for Salford City Council 2013
13
Amenity Grassland 50235m
2
plus Wildflower Meadow 30154m
2

19
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
Indicators Baseline Target Method for Evaluation Resources
3. HLF Output: The heritage of the park will be better interpreted and explained
Enable better
understanding of an
important part of Salford’s
heritage and social
history.
Celebrate the role the
park has played in the life
of the City.
Number of physical on
site interpretation
methods
0 414
Annual assessment of works
completed from contracts and
measured for Parks for People
Monitoring Data sheet and
Annual Report. Recorded in
Park Keeper Daybook
Volunteer time
Park Keeper Time
Staff at Salford
Museum and Art
Gallery time
Staff at University of
Salford time
Number of promotional
methods or tools used
1 3
Number of learning
partnerships formed with
other organisations
0 615
Number of “new
technology”
interpretation
0 316
Number of and
participation in events to
interpret/explain heritage
0 1617
Event surveys
Audience Surveys
14
Graphic Panels, Orientation points, interpretative text and tactile items, interpretative phrases on bench seating (Interpretation Plan 2015 PRB Ltd)
15
Learning partnerships to be formed with four local primary schools, Albion Academy and University of Salford. Activity Plan 2015
16
App, website based on BCC iWonder structure, 3D model and augmented reality showing the park as it was in the 1890s, digital interpretation points in the park
(Interpretation Plan 2015 PRB Ltd)
17
:Research and display of materials in the events in the history of the park through exhibitions, recording of memories and archaeology 3 Exhibitions.,1 Opening Event, 50
memories recorded and a permanent record created, Activity Plan 2015

20
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
Indicators Baseline Target Method for Evaluation Resources
4. HLF Output: The heritage of the park will be identified/recorded
Enable better
understanding of an
important part of Salford’s
heritage and social
history.
Number of heritage
elements previously
hidden now available to
the public through the
Peel Back program of
research and display of
materials in the events
in the history of the park.
N/A Three Peel
Back Time
Exhibitions
during the life
of the project.

Annual assessment of
activities for Parks for People
Annual Report
Visitor Counts
Volunteer time
Park Keeper Time
Staff at Salford
Museum and Art
Gallery time
Staff at University of
Salford time
50 memories
recorded and
a permanent
record
created
7% of visitors
who agree
that they have
a good
understanding
of the heritage
value of the
site
25 % of
visitors who
agree that
they have a
good
understanding
of the
heritage value
of the site
Visitor and resident surveys
Event surveys
Audience Surveys
Resident and visitor
survey £4500
Visitor Survey(s)
£500 plus volunteer
time.
Unexpected finds relating
to the heritage of the park
What was discovered?
How was it found?
What difference did it
make to people?
N/A N/A Visitor and residents surveys
Peel Back activities
Event Feedback
Audience Surveys
Recorded in the
Park Keepers Day
book and annual
report

21
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
Indicators Baseline Target Method for
Evaluation
Resources
5A . HLF Output: People will have developed skills; Education
Encourage better community
involvement in the development,
management and maintenance of
the park, through programme of
events, training and education.
Enrich the delivery of educational
programmes and improve the
city’s cultural offer.
No. Classes
engaged.
Number of students
engaged.
Students develop a
have a sense of
pride in the park.
2 Local
primary
Schools
Five
Classes
114 Pupils in
2014

4 Local schools
engaged.
8 primary classes
engaged p.a.
230 Primary school
students pa.
Albion Academy
engaged in activities
in the park.
60 secondary school
students involved in
projects in the park
p.a.
40 University
students involved in
projects in the park
p.a18
.
Feedback from
students
Feedback from staff
Number of visits by
primary, secondary and
university parties.
Number and % of
activities with an
educational element
Recorded annually in
the Parks for People
Monitoring Data sheet
and Annual Report
Park Keeper time
Ranger time
School, college
and University
staff time
Green Flag Score 26
Provision of
Appropriate
Educational
Information
4 “Poor” 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Green Flag
Assessment on
completion of works
and annually 2016-
2020
£1842:
Six assessments
at £307 each
18
Based on Activity Plan 2015. Includes use by students from the School of Environment and Life Sciences and Sports Science and on sport and fitness related courses

22
Ref- Aims for Peel
Park
Evaluation
Resources
5B . HLF Output: People will have developed skills; Volunteers and staff
Encourage better community
involvement in the development,
management and maintenance of
the park, through programme of
events, training and education.
Enrich the delivery of educational
programmes and improve the city’s
cultural offer.
New jobs created
(FTE)19
0 1 Employment of
uniformed Park Keeper
Years 1 to 5
£151,000 pa. 36
hours per week
New project
development
£17,000
Green Flag Score 22.
Community
Involvement in
management and
development
7 “Good” 9 “Excellent” Green Flag Assessment
on completion of works
and annually 2016-2020
£1842
Six assessments
at £307 each
Number of staff
attending structured
training activity20
0 2 Record kept by park
keeper/ ranger
Park Keepers
Journal
Number of volunteer
attending structured
training activity
0 30 pa.
(3 training
sessions p.a.)
Volunteer Case Studies.
Face to face interviews
volunteering from
records kept by Park
Keeper of number
volunteering, who
volunteers, hours of
volunteering, training and
qualifications obtained.
Used for Parks for
People Monitoring Data
sheet and Annual Report
Park Keeper time
Ranger time
Trainer time
Volunteer time
Number of
qualifications attained
0 20 p.a.
19
Plus one FTE through the input of volunteers
20
Accredited training only. On the job training will be given to all volunteers

23
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
Evaluation
Resources
6. HLF Output: People will have learnt about heritage
Enable better
understanding of an
important part of
Salford’s heritage and
social history.
% of visitors who agree
that they have a good
understanding of the
heritage value of the site
7% 25% Visitor and resident Surveys
Audience Surveys and Event
feedback
survey £4500
Visitor Survey(s)
time.
Number of people
engaging with
heritage/learning activities
0 1000 in life of
project
Count at activities based on
an estimate at “open
activities” and “register “ of
those attending activities
where pre-booking is
required/visitor and resident
Surveys
Staff Time
Volunteer time
7. HLF Output: People will have volunteered time
Encourage better
community involvement
in the development,
management and
maintenance of the park,
through programme of
events, training and
education
Number of volunteer
events p.a.
27 4121
. Annual record made of
volunteer events; numbers
attending, hours and training
Park Keeper time
Ranger time
Number of volunteer hours 484 hours 1631plus
hours pa.
Volunteer Case Studies
Face to face interviews.
volunteering from volunteer
and training registration of
number volunteering, who
Park Keeper time
Ranger timeManagement 256 hours22
206 hours
Maintenance 141 hours23
480 hours
Horticulture 0 625 hours
Capital Works 0 0 hours
Marketing inc. fund raising 37 hours24
42 hours
Historical Research 50 hours25
72 hours
One off Events 0 206 hours
21
Based on Activity Plan; 25 meetings of Gardening Club, 6 of Volunteer Rangers, 10 Student Volunteers.
22
Based on volunteer participation at Friends and Working Group Meetings, Friends Visits , Friends Admin and advice from the BBC and University of Salford
23
- Salford Park Ranger Team and student volunteering 2014
24
Friends attendance at events
25
Development and Implementation of the first stage of the Peel back Community Archive project

24
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
Evaluation
Resources
7. HLF Output: People will have volunteered time cont.
Volunteer Profile and
Gender
31% Male26
53% Male Demographic information
collected from volunteer and
training registration.
Volunteer Case Studies.
Face to face interviews.
volunteering from records
kept by park keeper/ranger
of number volunteering, who
Used for Parks for People
Annual Report.
Park Keeper time
Ranger time
69% Female 48% Female
Volunteer Profile: Ethnicity 82% white
18% BME
Volunteer Profile: Disability 10% Disabled
Volunteer Profile: Age Increase
participation
from the 25-44
age group
26
Gender recorded for maintenance volunteering in 2014. Profile not recorded for management activity

25
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
Evaluation
Resources
8 HLF Output: Your local community will be a better place to live, work or visit
Create a city park for
Salford and provide a
high quality green space
for all visitors
Enhance the setting of
Salford Museum and Art
Gallery.
Restore a venue for
small scale cultural
activities attracting
visitors from all sections
of the city
Improve the city’s
cultural offer
Strengthen the links
between the park user
and community and
make this once again
“A Park for the People”
Green Flag Score 33% 42% Green Flag Assessment on
annually 2016-2022
£1842
Six assessments at
£307 each
% of people who agree
that there is good
community spirit where
they live
Audience Surveys
Event Feedback
survey £4500
Visitor Survey(s)
time.% of residents who agree
the park enhances their
quality of life
Information
not collected
75%
% of residents who agree
that overall the area feels
safe
82% 95%
Number and % of activities
that are cultural (including
music and theatrical
events ) and number of
participants
2013/4:
Two events
(22%)
Min. 10
events.
1% all
events27
Count at activities based on
an estimate at “open
activities” and “register “of
those attending activities
where pre-booking is
required.
Audience Surveys
Event Feedback
Annual assessment for
Parks for People Monitoring
Data and Annual Report.
Park Keeper Time
Museum Staff Time
Volunteers
• Number of joint events
between Park and
Museum
• Number of participants

2013/4: 0 8 events28
1000
participants.
27
Based on Activity Plan; One Tree (two exhibitions), Sounds from the Other City (3 events), Theatre (one event), Film Festival (one event), Photography
Group (3 exhibitions)
28
Based on Activity Plan; Three Peel Back Exhibitions, Two One Tree Exhibitions, Three Photography Exhibitions.

26
Ref- Aims for
Peel Park
9. HLF Output: Environmental impacts will be reduced
Ensure all development
is sustainable in terms of
management and
maintenance.
Green Flag score for
Environmental impact
(Sustainability Indicators)
46% 70% plus Green Flag Assessment on
annually 2016-2022
£1842
Six assessments at
£307 each
Green flag score 14
Environmental
Sustainability
Not Collected 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Green flag score 15
Pesticide Use
5 Fair 10
(“Exceptional”)
Green flag score 16 Peat
Use
10 Excellent 7 plus
(“Good” to
“Exceptional”)
Green Flag score 17
Waste Minimalisation
4 Poor 7 plus
(“Good” to
Exceptional”)

27
Ref Aims
for Peel
Park
10A. HLF Output: More people and a wider range of people will have engaged with heritage
Visitors
To be used by
visitors and
students from the
surrounding
institutions, as well
as local residents.
Encourage greater
use of the park by
providing a diverse
range of activities
and ensuring the
park is safe and
accessible for all.
% of users who agree
that the park feels very
safe, safe or fairly safe
Event Feedback forms
Audience Surveys
Resident and
visitor survey
£4500
Visitor Survey(s)
£500 plus
volunteer time.
Number of facilities for
the disabled
0 329
Annual Report
Park Keeper time
Fixed Point Photography
(See Appendix E)
Volunteer time (St.
Phillips
Photography Club)
29
Three disabled parking bays within park, DDA compliant ramped access to middle terrace, seat in middle of pre-existing ramped access (on advice of
Access consultant)

28
Ref Aims
for Peel
Park
Indicators Baseline
(2013)
Target Method Resources
10A. HLF Output: More people and a wider range of people will have engaged with heritage
Visitors
Enable better
understanding of
an important part
of Salford’s
heritage and social
history
Celebrate the role
the park has
played in the life of
the City
Visitor Numbers p.a. 55000 120,000 Two automatic people counters
at busiest entrances to park
Purchase, location,
calibration and
maintenance 2014-
2020 £12,915
Park Keeper Time
% male 42% 50%30
Visitor and resident Surveys
Event Feedback
Audience Surveys
£9000
Two surveys at
£4500 each
%female 58% 50%
% white 92% 90%
%BME 7% 10%
% disabled 8% 10%
Largest Age Group
visiting
25-45
(40% visitors)
Increase 56 Plus age
group to 36% visitors
and under 25 to 33%
visitors
Smallest Age Group
Visiting
Under 25
(26% visitors)
Most Popular Reason
for visiting
Peaceful Retain this as most
popular reason for
visiting
Least Popular Reason
for visiting
Activities Increase the
proportion visiting to
take part in activities
% of park visitors who
do not live in the local
area
9.2% 20% (visitors from
Greater Manchester
and Other)
% local residents have
visited park in the last
year
73% 90%31
30
Based on the population characteristics of Salford City
31
Based on the proportion in the 2013 survey who did not visit the park because of its condition, reputation or not knowing where it was.

29
Ref Aims
for Peel
Park
10B. HLF Output: More people and a wider range of people will have engaged with heritage
Activities
Encourage greater
use of the park by
providing a diverse
range of activities
and ensuring the
park is safe and
accessible for all
Number and range of
activities including
• Arts and Craft led
• Educational
• Cultural
• Sport/Health
• Natural history
• Heritage
• Community
2014:
12 events
32
:
Arts and Crafts
17%
Community
33%
Cultural 36%
Natural History
8%
Heritage 8%
679 activities.33
Park Keeper will keep a
record with an annual
summary of activities number
of activities and attendance.
This will include a record of
school visits, teacher training,
heritage events, cultural
Natural history orientated
(including species benefitting)
and joint events with Salford
Museum and University
Park Keeper Time
Museum Staff Time
Volunteers
69 Educational
activities (10%)34
10 Cultural activities
(2%)35
15 Natural History
activities (2%)36
16 Heritage activities
(2%)37
66 Arts and Crafts
activities (10%)38
330 Sport/Health
activities (49%)39
27 Community
Activities (4%)40
32
Events organised by Salford City Council only
33
Based on the Activity Plan plus three one off events. Broughton Festival to be held in the park every other year
34
Based on the Activity Plan; 24 primary classes, 6 secondary school classes, 6 University classes, 24 Percy the Park Keeper (Story telling for under 5s), 9
volunteer training sessions over life of project
35
Based on the Activity Plan; 3 Photographic Group Exhibitions,, 2 ‘One Tree’ wood carving exhibitions, 3 Sounds from the Other City Music Festival, One
theatre performance and one film festival
36
Based on the Activity Plan; 15 Park Life Walks
37
Based on the Activity Plan; 3 ‘Peel Back’ History Exhibitions, 15 Park Lie Walks, 1 Peel Back Memories activity
38
Based on the Activity Plan; 60 Photography Group Meetings,6 cycle maintenance sessions
39
Based on the Activity Plan; 6 archery sessions, 144 Get Outdoors exercise sessions, 144 Park runs, 36 Sunday Cycles
40
Based on the Activity Plan; Peel Back Opening event, 3 Broughton Festivals,, 5 Pink Picnics, 18 seasonal events.

30
Ref Aims
for Peel
Park
10B. HLF Output: More people and a wider range of people will have engaged with heritage
Activities
Encourage greater
use of the park by
providing a diverse
range of activities
and ensuring the
park is safe and
accessible for all
Total Number attending
Act ivies in life of project
1842 in 2014 Minimum 5040
pa.(plus one off
events)
30,860 over life of
project41
Count at Activities
Audience Surveys
Event Feedback Forms
Annual Report
Park Keeper Time
Museum Staff Time
Volunteers
% male 40.2% 49 % of participants
% female 59.8% 51% of participants
% Disabled No record 10% of participants
% white No record 84% of participants
% BME No record 16% of participants
Age Under 25 33% 34% of participants
Age 26-45 50% 28% of participants
Age 45 plus 5% 37% of participants
41
Based on Activity Plan targets; Educational activity; 230 primary school children p.a., 60 secondary school children, 40 University students p.a.,1000 at
Peel Back Event, 1500 attending Broughton Festival, 120 participating in Get Outdoors per year, 8640 p.a. participating in the Park Run, 120pa in Sunday
cycle, 20pa bike maintenance, 480 pa health walks,200 children in Percy the Park Keeper, 450pa seasonal events, 800 attending One Tree Exhibitions, 500
attending theatre event, 500pa attending Pink Picnic, 500 attending film festival

31
Appendix B Information Required for Evaluation
Indicator Method Frequency Outputs
Green Flag Assessment
Green Flag Score Mock Green Flag Assessment 2013 and
On completion
and annually
2016-2020
1. The Park and its heritage will be better
managed
2. The Park and its heritage will be in
better condition
8. Your local community will be a better
place to live, work or visit
9. Environmental Impacts will be reduced
Green Flag Score; Category 8
Appropriate provision of facilities
Green Flag Score; Category 9
Quality of facilities
Green Flag Score Category 10
Litter and Waste Management
Grounds maintenance and
Horticulture
Building and Infrastructure
Maintenance
Green flag score category 14
Environmental Sustainability
Green flag score category 15
Pesticide Use
Green Flag score category 17
Waste Minimalisation
Green Flag score category 18
Arboriculture
Green Flag Score; 21
Conservation of buildings and
structures

32
Green Flag Assessment Cont.
Green Flag Score category 22
Community Involvement in
management and development
Mock Green Flag Assessment 2013 and
Volunteer case studies
Annual 5 People will have developed skills
Green Flag Score 26 Provision of
Appropriate Educational
Information
Facilities and Interpretation Record
Number of facilities Fixed point photography
Recorded in Annual Report and Final
Evaluation Report
At least two
surveys (See
Appendix E)
2. Park and its heritage will be in better
condition
3. The heritage of the park will be better
interpreted and explained
4. The heritage of the park will be
identified and recorded
Repair/restoration of historic
features
Fixed point photography
Evaluation Report
At least two
surveys (See
Appendix E)Restoration of landscape features
Number of facilities for the
disabled
Fixed point photography
Improvements to the
Infrastructure
Fixed point photography At least two
surveys (See
Appendix E)
Area of Grassland protected or
created
Single measure On completion of
works
Number of physical on-site
interpretation methods
works
Number of promotional methods
or tools used to explain the
heritage of the park
works
Number of hidden heritage
elements now available
Peel Back Memories; A community
archive to record memories etc
Ongoing

33
Activities Record
No. events to interpret/explain
heritage
Evaluation Report
Annual 3. The heritage of the park will be better
interpreted and explained
5. People will have developed skills
8. Your community will be a better place
to live work or visit
10 More people and a wider range of
people will have engaged with heritage
No promotional methods/ tools
used to explain the heritage of the
park
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. of learning partnerships
formed with other organisations
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. of “new technology”
interpretations
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. of projects researching and
displaying material on events in
the history of the park
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. of people engaging with
heritage/learning activities
Audience Surveys
Number of hits on the website
Number of guides and applications
downloaded
By event
By event
Annual
Annual
No. and % of activities with an
educational element:
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. classes engaged in
educational activities
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. students engaged in
educational activities
School participation surveys By Event
No. teachers on training days School participation surveys By Event
No and % of activities that are
cultural (including music and
theatrical events ) and number of
participants
Evaluation Report
Annual
No. of joint events between Park
and Museum.
Evaluation Report
Annual
Participants; gender, age,
ethnicity and disability
Audience Surveys
By Event

34
Volunteer Record
Number of volunteer events Park keeper will record events organised
through the park, the Friends and the
University that take place or support the
park in a Volunteer Record.
A record will be made of who volunteers
(in terms of gender, age, ethnicity and
whether they are disabled) and compared
to the population in the local area and for
Salford overall. Records will also be kept
of training and qualifications received.
An annual summary will be produced for
the report to HLF
By event plus
annual report
7. People will have volunteered time
Number of volunteers attending
structured training activity
Volunteer and training registration
Number of Qualifications obtained Record of training and qualification
Number of volunteer hours total Volunteer and training registration
Number of volunteer hours
engaged in: Management (inc.
Friends meeting)
engaged in: Maintenance
engaged in: Horticulture
engaged in: Capital Works
engaged in: Marketing

35
Volunteer Record
engaged in: Access
By event plus
annual summary
engaged in: fund raising
engaged in: One off events
engaged in: Historical Research
Volunteer profile: Gender,
Ethnicity Disability and age

36
Visitor Numbers People counters (2) at busiest entrances
Results downloaded monthly and
compared to weather and events.
Confirmed by annual calibration survey
and other surveys
Download
monthly and
annual report
1 The Park and its heritage will be better
managed
6 People will have learnt about heritage
8. Your community will be a better place
to live work or visit
10 More people and a wider range of
people will have engaged with heritage
Overall Visitor Satisfaction with
the park
Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
Visitor surveys on
completion of
work in the park
and at the end of
the project (as a
minimum).
Event feedback
and audience
surveys by event.
Annual report.
% residents/visitors who agree
the park is in good condition
Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
% of visitors who have a good
understanding of the heritage
value of the site
Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
% of users who agree the park
feels very safe, safe or fairly safe
Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
% visitors from University/Salford
College
Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
Visitors by gender Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
Ethnicity of visitors Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
% Visitors disabled Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
Largest Age Group visiting Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys

37
Smallest Age Group Visiting Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
Visitor surveys on
completion of
work in the park
and at the end of
the project (as a
minimum).
Event feedback
and audience
surveys by event.
Annual report.
Most Popular Reason for visiting Visitor Survey
Least Popular Reason for visiting Visitor Survey
% of park visitors who do not live
in the local area
Visitor Survey
Event feedback
Audience surveys
% of people who agree that the
park has a positive impact on the
local community
Resident survey On completion of
work in the park
and at the end of
the project% of residents who agree the
park enhances their quality of life
% of residents who agree that
overall the area feels safe

38
Appendix C People Counter Instructions
Introduction
This device counts the number of visitors passing it by registering their body heat.
Two were located in the park in 2014 at the entrance alongside the Maxwell Building
(G on the plan below) and the riverside entrance (B). They are intended to remain in
the park throughout the life of the project and provide basic information about the
number of visitors using the park on a daily basis
Calibration
The People Counters were located following a calibration survey to identify the
busiest entrances and provide additional information which can be extrapolated from
the basic count. This is done by a one day count of visitors at all entrances over
seven hours. Three shifts of professional surveyors are used to avoid fatigue and
ensure all entrances were covered. The entrances to the park are shown on the plan
below:
Plan One Peel Park Entrances

39
The initial calibration survey was undertaken on 8th
May 2014, a mid week when
there were no events in the park and no extremes of weather. Surveys were taken of
visitors at entrances B, C, E, F and G between 8am and 6pm by professional
surveyors. Entrance A from Wallness Lane was omitted as it was closed due to the
construction of the Student Village. A count was not taken at entrance D as the Irwell
footbridge was closed. The busiest entrances to the park were found to be B and G.
A copy of a typical survey sheet used is shown at the end of this appendix.
Calibration surveys should be held in May 2016 (when the capital works should be
largely complete) and in May 2018 in the same form as that carried out in 2014 for
the baseline survey. Survey points should be selected to reflect changes in the park,
This will mean that additional surveyors will need to be posted at points A & D when
the entrance from Wallness Lane and Irwell Bridge are opened.
People Counter Installation
The People Counter consists of the light grey box with side sensor mounted on a
steel chassis. The whole is contained in a black metal post with a cap secured by a
padlock. The post has 4 holes in the base to allow it to be bolted to a concrete base
or pad .The sensor beam projects through the opaque plastic window in the small
hole at the top front of the post. A logger (the yellow box) is supplied to recording
hourly totals of movements. The unit has a small green LED on the side of its case
and this flashes every 4 seconds when the unit is recording. The unit is ready to start
recording movements immediately the battery is connected. The brown core of the
cable is to be connected to the terminal marked ‘+’ and the blue core to the terminal
marked ‘-‘.The logger automatically stops recording when its memory is full.
The counter is designed to detect body heat at adult chest height and the optimum
range is 2 to 3 metres. The post should ideally be located at a natural pinch point
where walkers are in single file and unlikely to be counted a number of times. Siting
the unit close to a notice board or finger post can result in multiple counts. The post
should be securely fixed in the ground with the small sensor hole at the top of the
post looking directly across the path. Care should be taken to ensure that vegetation
will not grow and obscure the beam.
Setting up the Data Logger
The Data Logger allows the number of visitors to be downloaded to the Log Master
1.2 program. It also allows the analysis of visitor numbers by day/ week or month.
The Data Logger is contained within the small yellow box. This has two sockets; the
one on the side is for the power supply to the 12V lithium battery that powers the
People Counter and the socket next to the lights which provides a link to a laptop or
pc via a USB port or serial plug using the converter supplied.

40
The Data Loggers may need restarting. Restarting may also be needed when the
battery is replaced or if the loggers are stored out of use. To do this follows the
following instructions:
1. Set up the Log Master 1.2 program if not done so already
2. Start up Logmaster 1.2
3. Plug the Data Logger into a serial port or USB port
4. Open the Logger Screen on the Log Master and clock on Restart
NB. ALL UNSAVED RECORDS WILL BE LOST
5. Create a new identity if necessary. The Data Loggers for Peel Park have the
following identities:
1. Path alongside the Maxwell Building (Entrance G) ”
2. Riverside Path (Entrance B)
6. Choose the maximum number that will be recorded. Normally 3060 people
over 28 days
7. When screen indicates the logger can be disconnected. The green light on the
logger should flash every 4 seconds
The Data Logger can be stopped (for example to put it into storage) by following the
above sequence by clicking on “stop”. The logger will not record any more data until
it is restarted. For guidance on downloading data and transferring to a database see
the Help Files on Log Master 1.2
Testing
The assembly should then be tested (see below) before the lid is replaced.
The people counter has an LCD display showing the total number of movements
recorded. The count is zeroed by pressing the small red button alongside the
display. The counter has a Lithium battery (non-replaceable) which retains the count
in the event of the main battery failing.
The beam sensitivity is adjusted using the large black knob. Turning the knob
clockwise increases the sensitivity and anticlockwise decreases it. Start by setting
the knob at mid-range.
The people counter has a green Battery Check button which causes the small red
LED indicator alongside it to light up if the battery is connected and is healthy. If the
indicator is not lit when the button is pressed, check that the battery is properly
located inside the blue battery holder.
Check the number on the LCD display and then walk in front of the post. The count
should increase each time a person is detected. If multiple counts are given, then
reduce the sensitivity and if movements are missed, then increase the sensitivity.

41
Please refer to Data Retrieval software for detailed instructions on the Logger
operation.
Maintenance
The following items should be checked:
a. That the small hole at the top of the post is unobstructed.
b. The battery is a 12 Volt dry cell type, but is an industrial version which has been
sourced to ensure it gives reliable service at extreme temperatures. The battery
should be replaced every 12 months. The use of similar batteries from other
sources may result in loss of performance and records. Replacement batteries
are available from the supplier JT Systems (see Appendix K).The battery life may
be extended by wrapping it in a polythene bag to prevent water causing the
electricity to track across the sprung battery terminals. This may only be
necessary where the post is located in wet locations.
c. The Logger has a small battery inside it which should last approximately 2 years.
This should be replaced after this time to ensure that the data held in it is not lost.
It is recommended that the unit is returned to JT Systems at this stage (see
Appendix J).
Calculating Visitor numbers from the People Counters
The People Counters only measure the movement past the counter. Each Visitor will
generate two movements; In and Out and these may be at different entrances (or,
given the open nature of the park, at spaces between entrances). The Data Logger
(the yellow box) is removed from the People Counter and attached via an adapter to
a PC running Logmaster 1.2. The basic number of movements past each counter is
downloaded from the logger in the form of a Microsoft Text table which has to be
transferred and converted to MS Excel.
The Calibration Survey measured the numbers coming in and out at each entrance
between 8am and 6pm. This information can be used to give a total of visitors to the
park in any month using the basic information from the People Counters:
a) Converting the Calibration survey results into a 24 hour result
The Calibration Survey only measured the numbers entering and leaving the
park in daylight hours. The People Counter has shown that even in winter
people use the park after dark. The results from the Calibration Survey need
to be adjusted to allow for this. This is done by multiplying the totals for each
entrance and overall in the Calibration Survey by 1.28 (based on the
proportion of visitors using the park between 6pm and 8am between August
and December 2014). This applies only to the figures from the Calibration
survey; the data logger works 24 hours a day.

42
b) Creating a Multiplier for the whole park
To calculate the total number using the park from People Counters located at
only one entrance a multiplier is needed. This is based on the total number
entering the park in the calibration survey (multiplied by 1.28 to give an 24
hour figure as described above) divided by the number entering at the
entrance where the People Counter is located. Therefore;
A total of 124 people entered the park during the calibration survey. This is
multiplied by 1.28 to give an estimate of the number through 24 hours; 159. Of
these, 32 people entered by the entrance alongside the Maxwell Building (G)
where Counter One is located (an estimated 38 over 24 hours). Dividing this
into the total entering the park gives a multiplier of 4.13 i.e. for every person
entering at entrance G just over four people entered the park as a whole. The
other entrance where People Counter 2 is located (B alongside the Student
Village) is busier and has a multiplier of 2.1. Only the numbers entering the
park from the calibration survey are used to avoid double counting.
A table at the end of this appendix shows the multipliers for each entrance
based on the May 2014 survey.
c) Calculating numbers from one People Counter
Where only one People Counter is in use the total number of visitors to the
park can be calculated by dividing the total presented by the counter by the
proportion in the calibration survey that entered at that point (it is assumed
that everyone who enters the park leaves it!). This figure is then applied to the
multiplier for that entrance to give an estimate of the total entering the park.
Therefore;
In August 2014 there were 2018 people passing the counter at Entrance G
(alongside the Maxwell Building). The calibration survey suggests that 48% of
entering the park passed this point. Thus, we can assume that of the 2018
people passing the counter 969 were entering the park at this point in August
2014 (2018 multiplied by 0.48). Applying the multiplier for this entrance
calculated in paragraph (b) above (4.13) gives an estimated total for the park
as a whole total of 4004 visitors in August (969 multiplied by 4.13).
d) Calculating numbers from two People Counters
From November 2014 two counters were used at the two busiest entrances.
The calibration survey indicated that 72% of visitors entered by these two
entrances and 28% by other entrances. The total number visiting the park can
be calculated from the People Counter results from two entrances by
multiplying the combined total of people passing both counters by a multiplier
based on the numbers entering through these two entrances during the
calibration survey, divided into the total entering the park by all entrances from

43
the calibration survey (adjusted to give a 24 hour total as in (a) above). For
entrances B and G this multiplier is 1.28. Therefore;
In November 2014 the number passing the counter at the student village
(Counter 2 entrance B) was 3051 and the number of people passing the
counter at the Maxwell Building (Counter 1 entrance G) was 1586. The
calibration survey suggests 57% using entrance B were entering the park
while the proportion for entrance G is 48%. These are applied to the figures
from the people counters in November to suggest that 1739 people came into
the park via Entrance B (3051 multiplied by 0.57) and 761 people came into
the park through entrance G in November 2014 (1586 multiplied by 0.48). The
total number entering through these two entrances in November was 2500. As
28% of people came in other entrances in the calibration survey the total for
the park as a whole in November is 3200 (2500 multiplied by 1.28)

44
Calibration Survey Results and Analysis May 2014
Entrance Type Total %
Total
Multiplier
for 6pm
to 8am42
.
Estimated
Total for
24 hours
Multiplier for whole park
(In only)
Entrance B Counter 2
B - In Peds 49 47%
Cycles 5 5%
Children 6 6%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 60 57% 1.28 77 2.1
B - Out
Peds 35 33%
Cycles 4 4%
Children 6 6%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 45 43% 1.28 58
Total B 105 45% 1.28 134
Entrance C
C - In Peds 21 48%
Cycles 0 0%
Children 0 0%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 21 48% 1.28 27 5.9
C - Out Peds 22 50%
Cycles 1 2%
Children 0 0%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 23 52% 1.28 29
Total C 44 19% 1.28 56
Entrance E
E - In Peds 2 13%
Cycles 2 13%
Children 0 0%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 4 27% 1.28 5 31
E - Out Peds 7 47%
Cycles 0 0%
Children 0 0%
Elderly 0 0%
7 47%
Total E 15 6% 1.28 19
Entrance Type Total % Multiplier Estimated Multiplier for whole
42
Based on the average numbers passing through entrance G after 6pm August to December 2014

45
Total for 6pm
to 8am43
.
Total for
24 hours
park (In only)
Entrance F
F - In Peds 8 32%
Cycles 1 4%
Children 0 0%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 9 36% 1.28 12 13.8
F - Out Peds 7 28%
Cycles 0 0%
Children 0 0%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 7 28% 1.28 9
Total F 25 11% 1.28 32
Entrance G Counter 1
G - In Peds 17 27%
Cycles 8 775%
Children 1 2%
Elderly 4 6%
Total 30 48% 1.28 38 4.13
G - Out Peds 24 39%
Cycles 6 10%
Children 2 3%
Elderly 0 0%
Total 32 52% 1.28 41
Total G 62 27% 1.28 79
Total for Park
Total IN 124 54% 1.28 159
OUT 107 46% 1.28 137
231 100 1.28 296 1.38
43
Based on the average numbers passing through entrance G after 6pm August to December 2014

46
Sample Calibration Survey Form
Direction: In/ OUT Ref:
Location: Day/Date:
Surveyor: Weather: Use the Codes Listed at the Foot of
the Form for each Time Period
Time Adults Children Elderly Any Person
Using Pedal Cycle
Total Weather
Beginning (<16) Or
Infirm Mounted Dismounted
0800
0815
0830
0845
0900
0915
0930
0945
Total
1200
1215
1230
1245
1300
1315
1330
1345
Total
1500
1515
1530
1545
1600
1615
1630
1645
1700
1715
1730
1745
Total
Grand
Total
Highways Forecasting and Analytical Services (HFAS) Transport for Greater Manchester
(TfGM)

47
Appendix D People Counter Results August 2014 to January 2015
The estimated annual number of visitors to the park is: 55,000
This is based on the number of people passing the People Counters in Entrance G
and B (see Plan One in Appendix C) between August 2014 and January 2015
extrapolated to provide a figure for 12 months. This is higher than the initial estimate
and suggests that the target number of users could be raised. An Observation Study
(see paragraph 7.5) would help more accurately determine where visitors go in the
park and which entrances they use. However it is probable that most of these visitors
are actually passing through the park rather than using it for activities.
Visitor Numbers over time
The chart below shows that, contrary to what might be expected, the number of
people using the park in August is lower than in the autumn. This is due to the
location of the park on the edge of a University Campus which is relatively quiet
during the summer months. The number of users showed a marked increase at the
start of the autumn term at the end of September. Numbers fall from this date but
pick up slightly with th new term in January 2015.
Numbers at Entrances
The Calibration survey suggested that the entrances on the between the River Irwell
and the Student Village (ref. B) and the entrance alongside the Maxwell Building of
the University (ref. G) were the busiest entrances of the seven entrances into the
park (see the map in Appendix C for their locations). Entrance B is the closest to the
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Aug‐14 Sep‐14 Oct‐14 Nov‐14 Dec‐14 Jan‐15
Number of Visitors by Month

48
nearest housing on the “Spike Island” estate and to the existing student
accommodation at Castle Irwell to the north. The large number suggests that the
park is used by students and local residents even if only as a short cut. Numbers
using this entrance may change significantly when the student village is occupied
and the Castle Irwell accommodation closes. Entrance G is on an obvious route
between Chapel Street (which links Salford to Manchester and is a major bus route)
and most of the University Peel Park Campus. The chart below shows the proportion
using each entrance. The results for entrance B are omitted for August to October as
the People Counter had not been installed at this location.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Aug‐14 Sep‐14 Oct‐14 Nov‐14 Dec‐14 Jan‐15
Other Entrances
Entrance G
Entrance B

49
Visitor Numbers over each day
The Chart below shows on average when the park is visited (using the results from
entrance G). As might be expected, this peaks around the middle of the day but
there are smaller peaks in the morning and evening reflecting the role of the park as
a route to and from the University. The slightly different pattern to use in January
may be due to the onset of dusk around 3pm. Peaks in the evening in October may
be due to the evening Halloween event. The peak in November is less easy to
explain. It is interesting to note from the total counts that there is some use of the
park after the hours of darkness. This is expected to increase when improvements to
lighting are carried out and the student village is occupied.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Midnight‐1am
1am‐2am
2am‐3am
3am‐4am
4am‐5am
5am‐6am
6am‐7am
7am‐8am
8am‐9am
9am‐10am
10am‐11am
11am‐Midday
Midday‐1pm
1pm‐2pm
2pm‐3pm
3pm‐4pm
4pm‐5pm
5pm‐6pm
6pm‐7pm
7pm‐8pm
8pm‐9pm
9pm‐10pm
10pm‐11pm
11pm‐Midnight
August
September
October
November
December
January

50
Appendix D Mock Green Flag Field Assessment 2013
Green Flag Award Score Sheet
Scoring line
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Very Poor Poor Fair Good Very
Good
Excellent Exceptional
Name of Green Space Peel Park
Managing Authority Salford City Council
Judge Steve Jones
Final Score Field Assessment (Minimum pass 42) 33
Would a green flag have been awarded in a live assessment No
Field Assessment
Criteria Score Evaluation
A welcoming Place?
1. Welcoming 4 Poor
2. Good and Safe Access 3 Poor
3. Signage 2 Poor
4. Equal Access for All 3 Poor
Healthy, Safe and Secure?
5. Safe Equipment and facilities 4 Poor
6. Personal Security in Park 4 Poor
7. Dog Fouling 5 Fair
8. Appropriate provision of Facilities 2 poor
9. Quality of Facilities 5 Fair
Clean and Well maintained?
10. Litter & Waste Management 4 Poor
11. Grounds Maintenance and
Horticulture
3 Poor
12. Building and Infrastructure 4 Poor

51
maintenance
13. Equipment Maintenance N/A
Sustainability?
14 Environmental Sustainability N/A
15.Pesticide Use 5 Fair
16. Peat Use 10 Exceptional
17 Waste Minimisation 4 Poor
18 Arboriculture and Woodland
Management b
4 Poor
Conservation and Heritage
19 Conservation of Natural Features,
wild fauna and flora
4 Poor
20 Conservation of landscape features 4 Poor
21. Conservation of Buildings and
Structures
4 Poor
Community Involvement
22. Community Involvement in
Management and Development
7 Good
23 Appropriate Provision for Community 3 Poor
Marketing
24 Marketing and Promotion 5 Fair
25 Provision of Appropriate Information 4 Poor
26 Provision of Appropriate educational
information
4 Poor
Management
27. Implementation of Management Plan 0 Very Poor
Total 100
Average (Total Divided by 21) 5
Out of 70 (Average times 7) 33

52
Appendix E Fixed Point Photographs
Map
Ref
Location. Orientation View
1 Road Entrance outside
Maxwell Building
East Riverside Entrance to Park
2 Edge of pavement
opposite SE corner of Peel
Building
NE Peel Entrance to park and
frontage of museum
3 South edge of slope
Newton Plaza
N Peel Park Entrance through
Newton Plaza
4 Top of stairs behind
Museum
N Floral Beds
5 Landing W Landing and proposed DDA route
6 Landing SE Proposed Park Keepers Office
7 Eastern side of Floral beds W Across Beds
8 Path to south of floral bed S Across Beds and steps to
Museum
9 Top of Fabric of Nature
earthwork
- Fabric of Nature mosaic
10 Top of Fabric of Nature
earthwork
SE Play Area
11 Perimeter path Crescent
Meadows
W Riverside embankment
12 Path to slope NE Site of proposed performance
area
13 Path between Irwell Bridge
and University steps
W University Steps
14 Path to Wallness Lane E Site of proposed seating area
15 Path between Irwell Bridge
and University steps
E Bridge to Irwell Bridge
16 Path to Wallness Lane N Wallness Lane entrance,
Broadwalk and student village
17 Path to Wallness Lane SE View of park from Wallness Lane
18 Riverside Path at Student
Village
SW View of park from Riverside path
entrance
19 Riverside Path at Student
Village
NW View of Student Village

53
Plan Two Fixed point photography locations and orientation of photographs

Baseline Fixed P
Novemb
Number
1
2
3
4
Point Pho
ber 2014
rs indica
tographs
4
ate locati
54
ions in P
5
6
7
8
Plan X

Fixed p
and at
additio
17
19
point photo
t the end
nal locatio
ography su
of the pro
ns created
urveys sho
oject as a
d due to ad
56
18
Phot
Phot
ould be ta
minimum
djoining dev
tographs
tography
ken once
using the
velopment
by St. P
y Club
physical w
e locations
t).
Phillips
work is com
on Plan
mpleted
2 (plus

57
Appendix G Visitor/Resident Survey Sample Questions
These questions and the suggested answers were used in the 2013 survey and
should be repeated in 2020 to allow comparison of surveys throughout the life of the
project and to match HLF monitoring requirements. Questions relevant to visitors
could also be used in visitor surveys carried out by volunteers. Surveys can also be
used as an opportunity to promote the park, its activities, volunteering and
membership of the Friends group.
Do you know where Peel Park is Yes/No
Where do you live: (Postcode)
How often do you visit Peel Park?
• Almost every day
• Once/twice a week
• Once a month
• Once every six months
• Once a year
• Never
How often do you visit David Lewis Playing Fields44
?
• Once a month
• Once a year
• Never
How often do you visit Crescent Meadows?45
• Once a month
• Once a year
• Never
What do you do when you visit the park?
• Observe the wildlife
• Socialise with friends
• Exercise
• Events/entertainment
• Take children to playground
• Play sports and games
• Walk the dog
44
Open space to the north of Peel Park
45
Open space on the opposite bank of the River IIrwell

58
• Just passing through
• Other (Specify)
How long do you normally stay?
• Less than 30 minutes
• 30 minutes
• 1 hour
• 1-2 hours
• 2-4 hours
• More than 4 hours
How do you normally travel to the park?
• On foot
• Bicycle
• Motorbike
• Car
• Bus
Which entrance do you use? (Open answer)
What do you like most about this park? (Open answer)
How could be make the park better? (Open answer)
Do you think it is in good condition? Yes/No
If no why? (open answer )
In general how safe do you feel in the park?
• Very Safe
• Safe
• Fairly Safe
• Not very safe
• Not safe at all
Do you carry out any volunteering in the park? Yes/No
How satisfied are you with the park?
• Very Satisfied
• Reasonably Satisfied
• Nether satisfied or dissatisfied
• Not satisfied
What do you know about the history of the park? (open answer)
Do you think the park has a positive impact on local people? Yes/No/Don’t know

59
Demographic Questions
These should be included in questionnaire and interviews surveys including surveys
at events and information collected from volunteers (when starting volunteering
activities)
Interviewees should be told the reason why the information is collected e.g.
“Salford City Council is committed to equality of opportunity and fairness in
the way that we deliver services. We believe that all people have the right to
be treated with dignity and respect when coming into contact with the
Council
We would like you to complete and return the questionnaire below which you
will see contains questions relating to your cultural background as well as
sex, age and disability. These questions are necessary to ensure we provide
a comprehensive service to all members of our community. The information
will be treated confidentially and will only be used to identify groups of
people not at present using our services and for monitoring”.
Gender Female/Male
Do you consider yourself disabled Yes/No
Age
• Under 25
• 25-35
• 36-45
• 46-55
• 56-65
• 65-75
• Over 75
Ethnic Origin
NB This is not about nationality place of birth or citizenship. They are about broad
ethnic group UK citizens can belong to any of the groups indicated.
White British/Irish/Other
Mixed White and Black Caribbean/White and Black African/White and Asian
Other
Black Caribbean/African/Other
Asian Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi/Chinese/Other
Arab
Other Ethnic Group

60
Appendix H Summary of Results of Visitors and Residents
Survey 2013
Visits to the Park
How often do you visit the park in the last year?
Daily Weekly Monthly Once
every
six months
Annually Never
67 103 92 60 55 138
13% 20% 18% 12% 11% 27%
Source: 2013 survey of residents and visitors.
Reasons for visiting the park
Reason %
Peaceful/Out of Town Feel 25
Greenery/Open Space/Scenery/Gardens 28
Play Equipment 8
Wildlife 7
Convenient 6
River Irwell 5
Activities 4
Good for kids 4
History/memories 7
Everything 2
Nothing 4
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Frequency of Visits
Frequency of Visits

61
Reasons for not visiting the park
Reason %
Personal; No time, don’t visit parks , use other parks, too far 17
Don’t know where Peel Park is, new to area, poor access to the park 11
Reputation of the park; scary, unsafe, tales of drinking and drugs 6
No supervision/ranger 1
Nothing to do there 5
Not Family friendly 4
Condition of the park 51
Reasons for Visiting
Peaceful
Greenery
Play Equipment
Wildlife
Convenient
River Irwell
Activities
Good for kids
History
Everything
Nothing
Reasons for not visiting Peel
Park Personal
Access
Reputation
Lack of
supervision
Nothing to do
Not Family
Friendly

62
Demography of Visitors
Gender
Gender of wider area for comparison
% Visitors to the Park Local Area46
Salford Greater Manchester47
Male 42 53.3 49.9 49.4
Female 58 46.7 50.1 50.6
Source: 2013 survey of residents and visitors. ONS 2011 Census
Disability
% Disabled of wider area for comparison
% Visitors to the Park Local Area Salford Greater Manchester
Disabled48
8% 11.0 8.3 9.91
46
Area comprising super output area - lower layer within 1200m of park; Salford 016A, Salford 016B,
Salford 016C, Salford 017B, Salford 017F, Salford 022D, Salford 022F, Salford 022G, Salford 022H
Salford 022K ,Salford 022J, Salford 023A, Salford 023C, Salford 024A, Salford 024B, Salford 024C
Salford 024D
47
Comprises principle members of Association of Greater Manchester Authorities; Bolton, Bury,
Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, Wigan
48
Source: 2013 survey of residents and visitors (based on the question “Do you consider yourself
disabled”). Results for other areas from ONS 2011 (“Disability: Day-to-day activities limited a lot”).
0 20 40 60 80
Visitors to the Park
Local Area
Salford
Greater Manchester
Female
Male
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Visitors to the Park
Local Area
Salford
Greater Manchester
Disabled

63
Age
Age of wider area for comparison
%
Visitors to the
Park Local
Area
Salford
(Met.
District)
Greater
Manchester
Under
25
26
38 33 34
26-35 20 23 18 14
36-45 20 12 14 14
46-55 14 11 12 13
56 plus 18 17 23 24
Source: ONS 2011 Census
Ethnicity
Ethnicity of wider area for
comparison
Visitors to
the Park
%
Local
Area
%
Salford
(Met District)
%
Greater
Manchester
%
White: British 89 80 84 80
Other White 3 10 6 4
Mixed 2 3 2 2
Asian/Asian British 1 6 4 10
Black/African/Caribbean/Black
British
2 7 3 3
Other ethnic group 2 2 1 1
Source: ONS 2011 Census
0 10 20 30 40
Under 25
26‐35
36‐55
46‐55
56 plus
Greater Manchester
Salford
Local Area
Visitors

64
Home Postcode of Visitors
Two Figure Postcode of
visitors
%
M7 54
M6 24
M5 4
M3 9
Other Manchester 7
Other 3
Peel Park is bordered by the M6 postcode area to the north, M5 to the south.
Postcode areas M7 and M3 are also close.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
White British
Other white
Mixed
Asian
Black
Other
Greater Manchester
Salford
Local Area
Visitors
% from Postcodes
M7
M6
M5

65
Appendix I Summary of result of Student Survey November 2014
Situated as it is, students are likely to be major users of Peel Park. This survey was
conducted in November 2011 by interviewing students in the Peel Park Campus
(nearest the park). This used the same survey questions as the residents and visitor
survey. 84% of those interviewed knew where the park was.
How often do you visit the Park?
Almost every day 0%
Once / twice a week 10%
Once a month 8%
Once every six months 2%
Once a year 24%
Never 57%
Reasons for not visiting the park
Heard it is unsafe 24%
No need to 17%
Too busy 3%
Would visit if it was nicer 3%
Weather - too cold 3%
Just visiting 3%
Poor access 3%
Not heard of it 14%
New to the area 14%
Students living at home 14%
What do you do when you visit the park?
Observe wildlife 10%
Socialise with friends 0%
Exercise 17%
Events / entertainment 0%
Visit the playground 14%
Play sports and games 5%
Walk the dog 0%
Just passing through 31%
Study 17%
Other (specify) 7%

66
How long do you normally stay?
Less than 30 minutes 36%
30 minutes 9%
1 hour 27%
1 - 2 hours 18%
2 - 4 hours 9%
More than 4 hours 0%

What do you like most about the park?
Green open space 43%
Wildlife / nature 10%
Quiet / calm 14%
Place to relax 5%
Swings / play equipment 10%
Short cut / off road route 19%

67
Appendix J Summary of results of Surveys at Events
1. Customer Satisfaction Surveys at Events 2013
Number Surveyed
Date Event Number Surveyed
7th
August 2013 Play Day 5
30th
October 2013 Spooky Spectacle 15
19th
December 2013 Winter Wonderland 7
Previous Visits to the Park
Frequency No. %
Never 10 41.6
Occasional 9 37.5
Regular 5 20.8
How did you find out about the event?
Method Number %
Word of Mouth 13 52
Poster/Flyer 10 40
Internet 2 8
Age Bracket
Age Group No %
No Response 2 3.9
Under 5 9 17.6
6-12 4 7.8
13-18 2 3.9
19-30 12 23.5
31-59 12 23.5
60+ 0 0

68
Home Address of Visitor
Postcode Area Number %
M3 1 4
M5 3 12.5
M6 7 29.1
M7 9 37.5
Elsewhere 3 12.5
Means of Travel
Method No. %
Walk 10 37
Cycle 2 7.4
Public Transport 5 18.5
Car 12 44
2. Customer Satisfaction Surveys at events 2014
49
Previous Visits to the Park
Frequency No. %
Never 12 66
Daily 1 5
Once a week 1 5
Monthly 2 11
Every six months 2 11
How did you find out about the event?
Method Number %
Word of Mouth 8 57
Social Media 4 28.5
Internet 2 14
49
Not all of those surveyed answered all questions

69
Age Bracket
Age Group No %
Under 25 6 33
25-35 8 44
36-45 3 16
46-55 1 5
55+ 0 0
Home Address of Visitor
Postcode Area Number %
M3 4 20
M5 0 0
M6 7 35
M7 8 40
Elsewhere 1 5
Means of Travel
Method No. %
Walk 10 37
Cycle 2 7.4
Public Transport 5 18.5
Car 12 44

Stage 2 HLF submission - February 2015
Peel Park PP-13-06497

PP SD no 8 Evaluation plan

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (13)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to PP SD no 8 Evaluation plan

Similar to PP SD no 8 Evaluation plan (20)

PP SD no 8 Evaluation plan