2000/2005
Evaluation Framework 2003 - 2010

Birmingham as a self-sustaining literate, numerate and IT competent community 

The original evaluation strategy and evaluation framework was drawn up partly as a response to funding sources (requirements of the Single Regeneration Budget); partly as a mechanism to draw out insights (as wanting to be an intelligent, learning organisation – within a learning city); partly to explore how evaluation could most usefully be undertaken in a set of operations that linked higher level strategic direction with day to day activities in more than 1,000 organisations, impacting on more than 500,000 people.

It looked at the Partnership’s activities at three levels:

  1. as a city-level, externally-funded, regeneration programme having to meet a specified set of requirements re robustness of financial systems; robustness of outputs and outcomes; compliance with contracts/audit/spot checks etc.
  2. as an operating system guaranteeing effective partnership working across disparate agencies; offering high levels of value for money; bringing about agreed meaningful changes; avoiding deadweight/displacement in a rapidly evolving environment; supporting and driving improved outcomes for residents; maintaining an overall coherence etc.
  3. (c) as a support mechanism for a raft of day-to-day activities designed to change the infrastructure re core skills – changing professional practices, improving curriculum/outreach materials and resources; raising quality standards etc.

The original Evaluation Strategy was agreed by the Board in 1997 and has been implemented consistently since then. The major outcomes of this work are a series of reports by Andrew Harrison of GFA Consulting. This has headlined a series of positive findings and has indicated a set of insights that have much wider applicability across other regeneration/renewal activities. These reports can be found on the Partnership’s website (www.coreskills.co.uk).

Evaluation Framework (2003-2010)

This lists elements of the Partnership’s activity that will be important to evaluate in a formative way to ensure continued high level impact and value for money.

Phase 1: 2003-2006

(A) Overall

  1. Extent to which the Core Skills Partnership continues to be seen as a legitimate force for change in relation to core skills developments
    1. in the local system or organisations
    2. regionally and nationally
  2. Extent to which the lessons learnt/insights gained from the Partnership’s activity 1995-2003, are
    1. built upon by the Partnership’s activities 2003-2006
    2. built into other renewal/regeneration activities
    3. given recognition locally and nationally
  3. Extent to which the overall direction of the Partnership, and its partner organisations, reflect
    1. the vision for the area
    2. the development principles agreed by the Board
  4. Extent to which the Partnership successfully repositions its functions in relation to
    1. Neighbourhood Renewal and Community Strategy structures and processes
    2. National and regional strategic structures and processes

(B) Operating Principles

  1. Extent to which the Partnership successfully maintains (via partner organisations’ planning and funding of developments)
    1. improved effectiveness within partners
    2. improved coherence across partners
  2. Extent to which the Partnership has been able to sustain
    1. an efficient adding of value beyond partners’ separate activities
    2. a well-communicated set of messages for change
  3. Extent to which the Partnership has been able to extend core skills developments
    1. into new agencies, networks and structures
    2. in innovative and efficient ways
  4. Extent to which the Partnership has continued to
    1. set the pace of change
    2. remain realistic and effective
  5. Extent to which the Partnership has enabled
    1. transfer of learning across agencies, sectors, phases, organisations
    2. use of expertise to push forward developments
  6. Extent to which progress has been made
    1. against substantial aspects of each agreed strategic objective
    2. against stretching targets, aspirations and planned outcomes