Urban-rural linkages enhancing European territorial competitiveness: background paper

This background paper provides the context for the seminar on urban-rural linkages enhancing European territorial competitiveness, to be held by DG REGIO on 17th September 2008. This seminar forms part of an ongoing debate at European level on the importance of urban-rural linkages for territorial competitiveness, and on appropriate support mechanisms to assist these developments in Member States

Community Economic Development Initiative (CEDI) Programme Evaluation

Shotton Colliery Community Economic Development Initiative (CEDI) began in 2007. It is one of three CEDI areas funded through the Single Programme. CEDI builds on a previous County Durham-wide programme, Settlement Renewal Initiatives (SRIs), which ended in 2006. Shotton Colliery CEDI receives funding from One North East, the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund and the Shotton Investment Pot. The aim of CEDI is to improve the local economy in Shotton Colliery by designing projects to support local people and businesses. The emphasis is on removing barriers to employment, supporting skills and training, and stimulating business growth. CEDI’s outcomes are: 1. New economic activity contributing to diversification in the local economy; 2. Enhance the contribution made by the settlement to the local economy; 3. Reduced unemployment and worklessness; 4. Increased skill levels and educational attainment; 5. Improved access to employment through addressing multiple barriers such as poor health, childcare responsibilities and transport; 6. Increased economic opportunities through enhancing the built and natural environment. CEDI outcomes are organised into four themes: community enterprise; reducing worklessness; education, training and skills, and business support and stimulating entrepreneurship. Projects to achieve the outcomes include the development of community enterprises such as a community café, increasing the range of leisure, welfare and learning opportunities offered by the community centre, improved broadband access for the area, and initiatives to support unemployed people and encourage business growth. Shotton Partnership 2000 Ltd oversees the CEDI along with partner agencies including Shotton Parish Council and Easington District Council. It commissioned this independent evaluation in November 2007. The evaluation had the following objectives: to consider the effectiveness of the delivery of Shotton CEDI against the outputs and outcomes included in the project’s approval; to examine the particular circumstances that exist in Shotton and which may have impacted on the delivery of CEDI; and to recommend potential activities and outcomes that would be of benefit to the community of Shotton and match the aspirations of those supporting the initiative in its continuation

RIC Impact Assessment

The Regional Infrastructure Consortium (RIC) has existed in its current form since May 2007. Its role is to assess need and identify new projects region-wide, agree plans and priorities for region-wide infrastructure services, allocate resources, and feed into strategic regional structures. The RIC has a membership of around 60 individuals and organisations, and holds regular meetings within the region. To conduct this impact assessment, email questionnaires were sent to three stakeholder groups: RIC members, Regional Infrastructure Development Group (RIDG) members and Infrastructure Strategic Partnership (ISP) members. 14 RIC members and 8 others returned completed questionnaires. RIC members were quite positive about their involvement with the RIC, agreeing that, for instance, it had enabled them to contribute to the RIC Business Plan and provided networking opportunities. However, several people made comments regarding the role of Capacitybuilders, which was seen as problematic and was thought to have increased time pressures on the RIC. In addition, it seemed that there was not a clear vision of the RIC’s specific role, responsibilities, and relationships to other regional and sub-regional bodies, and there were concerns expressed about future funding issues. Key recommendations for the RIC were developed at a review session. RIC members and stakeholders were asked to use the survey findings to assess the impact of the different aspects of the RIC with reference to the resources devoted to each. Following the Change Check method, the recommendations were categorised as actions for now (within the next 6 months), soon (in the next 6–12 months) and later (12 months and beyond)

Facilitation and Grant Management Project Evaluation

The Facilitation and Grant Management project involves two separate aspects: the administration and organisation of RIC meetings, and development of associated projects and protocols; and the administration of grants. Grant management took place under the old consortium process; projects were asked to submit bids which were then rated and the top four awarded funding. Funded projects received monitoring visits and completed performance monitoring returns. To conduct this evaluation, email questionnaires were sent to three stakeholder groups: RIC members, Regional Infrastructure Development Group (RIDG) members and Infrastructure Strategic Partnership (ISP) members. 14 RIC members and 8 others returned completed questionnaires. The researchers also interviewed the Senior Policy and Development Manager at VONNE, who oversees the project, and undertook a deskbased review of reports and papers relating to the project. The Facilitation project has successfully supported the RIC in its first year in its new structure, helping it to, for instance, achieve Fit for Purpose status, produce a Delivery Plan, Business Plan and Strategy, carry out a self-assessment, and commission research projects. The Grant Management project has managed to create the appropriate procedures for grant management, and make grants to FINE and the ICT project (the Facilitation and Grant Making project also receives funding). Survey findings revealed that RIC members and stakeholders regard the facilitation of the RIC to be successful. For instance, the majority of respondents thought that RIC meetings were well run, that VONNE project staff facilitating RIC meetings are helpful and supportive, that the materials provided to RIC members are of a high quality, and that meeting minutes are accurate. For the grant management aspect of the project, most RIC members and stakeholders agreed that the prioritisation and rating procedures used to assess grant applications were useful and valid, and that grants were awarded based on a fair process of appraisal. Concerns were raised about the short timescales previously involved in the grant management process, and about the need to ensure that any funding opportunities are advertised right across the third sector. At a Change Check review session, RIC members and stakeholders were asked to use the survey findings to assess the impact of the different aspects of the RIC with reference to the resources devoted to each. The results of this process were also largely positive, although future funding and grant management issues are in question for the RIC. It was not considered appropriate to make recommendations for the project. The Facilitation project operates in a way that responds to the developing needs of the RIC, and the research findings did not reveal any particular problems with the way that it has worked up to now. The Grant Management aspect of the project has been completed in its current form. However, there were some potential transferable lessons emerging from the findings for future grant management programmes, e.g. minimising time pressures in the bidding programme, and making sure all the third sector is made aware of funding opportunities

Funding Information North East: Independent External Evaluation

The evaluation objectives included: reviewing the quality of FINE’s present services; identifying service gaps and income generation opportunities; considering how best to support funding advisors; assessing what future developments are needed to help Third sector meet funding challenges in the region; evaluating advantages/disadvantages of different structures and governance arrangements for FINE; assessing FINE’s added value through the relationship between FINE’s services and the amount of money levered into the region by the Third sector; and providing a list of options to assist FINE in developing its capacity and becoming more sustainable

The voluntary and community sector in Blyth Valley - developing a vision for the future

1. Sustainable Cities Research Institute has produced this report following research carried out on behalf of Blyth Valley Local Strategic Partnership. The research involved documentary analysis, case studies, and interviews and focus groups involving key players within the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS). 2. The VCS is regarded as a significant contributor to the area’s economy and a key service delivery agent. Broadly defined, it contributes about 3.8% of regional GDP and employs an estimated 4.4% of the region’s workforce. An estimated 40,000 organisations are thought to be active in the region. 3. A number of external pressures influencing the sector were identified: the need to engage with LSPs and play a full part in other local and regional networks; the need to respond to changes in governance structures; funding changes such as the end of SRB funding; and the need for strong infrastructure organisations to support the sector and enhance communication systems. 4. Contributors identified the following strengths of Blyth Valley VCS: good partnership working; dedicated volunteers; flexibility and speed of response; valuable training provision; high quality community centres; excellent community links, including involving hard to reach people; value for money; and diversity within the sector. 5. However, it was thought that the following areas could be improved upon: the relationship with the LSP; some community buildings being underused; heavy reliance on a few key staff and volunteers; structural issues, which can result in duplication of resources; heavy demands in terms of time, resources and skills; inflexible monitoring systems; the problems of short-term funding; level of social economy activity; and the need to promote the sector. 6. A number of aspirations were identified for the sector: better funding arrangements and more long-term funding; developing the infrastructure by building more centres outside Blyth town; more centralised organisational support for VCS agencies; more social economy activity, and closer working between agencies. 7. The preferred option for the future of the VCS was the development of a new infrastructure organisation that can, where appropriate, incorporate the existing infrastructure organisations and provide support to the sector as a whole. It was thought that the option of establishing this new organisation as a Development Trust should be further explored. 8. The new organisation could act as a ‘One Stop Shop’ providing advice and support on fundraising, management, human resources, health and safety, insurance, and training. It could also lend weight to funding applications; help to develop more sustainable relationships with the Council and LSP, thus freeing the Community Development Team to develop its strategic role; enhance levels of co-ordination within the sector; and develop a dedicated research facility for the sector. 9. To minimise the range of concerns expressed about how the process of change is to be managed, it is recommended that the next step should be to commission a feasibility study that will explore the various options regarding the process of change - and the establishment of the new organisation - in greater detail. 10. This report will be launched at an event held for Blyth Valley VCS in Spring 2004

'It'll get worse before it gets better': Local experiences of living in a regeneration area

The negative consequences of living in deprived neighbourhoods for residents’ quality of life are well documented. Area-based regeneration initiatives are invariably concerned with improving local quality of life over the long term. The process of regeneration, however, can itself directly result in immediate and potentially lasting negative effects for local communities. This paper discusses some of the ways in which living in an area undergoing regeneration can adversely affect inhabitants’ quality of life, including problems associated with voids, relocation, demolitions, environmental quality, complexity, funding issues, uncertainty, frustration, fear for the future and consultation fatigue. A case study approach draws examples from a deprived neighbourhood in the North East of England. The conclusion discusses some of the possible implications for future regeneration policy, including: the importance of ongoing communication between professionals and communities; the need to value local people’s experience, judgement and the contribution they can make to local decision-making processes; recognition that successful regeneration can take many years; and the implications of current UK government policy

Swimming against the tide: a study of a neighbourhood trying to rediscover its ‘reason for being’– the case of South Bank, Redcar and Cleveland

Many of the programmes and initiatives to regenerate deprived neighbourhoods appear to have had limited lasting impact. It has been argued that one reason for this is that we still have little real understanding of the nature and scale of the problems some communities face (Bernt, 2009). This paper attempts to add to our knowledge through close study of an area with multiple problems and a history of failed regeneration attempts. An in-depth case study undertaken to explore the current situation and future prospects of South Bank, a small neighbourhood in the North East of England, highlights transferable knowledge which may be applied to other regeneration areas. The analysis considers the nature and consequences of industrial decline; entrenched deprivation; the stigmatization of communities; the value of community consultation and the potential impact of retail-led regeneration. We question whether negative stigma attached to places can be changed and we ask what the future may hold for deprived communities now that public sector funding has largely dried up, and we consider an alternative approach: the potential impacts of private sector retail-led regeneration in the absence of public sector funding