evaluation of the people & places programme

Evaluation of the Big Lottery Fund’s People

and Places Programme

Year 4 report

Acknowledgements

We would like to offer our thanks to all those interviewed as part of the evaluation who gave their

time so willingly and answered our questions in such detail. In particular, we would like to thank

those projects visited during 2011 and the volunteers and beneficiaries who took the time to speak

to our research team. This report would not have been possible without all these contributions.

Report prepared by:

Endaf Griffiths

Louise Petrie

Charlotte Ellis

Simon Hartwell

Richard Brooks

Any queries or questions about this report should be referred in the first instance to Endaf Griffiths:

t: 01545 571711 | e: [email protected]

Client contact:

Graham Brand, Big Lottery Fund Wales

e: [email protected]

Report version: FINAL

Cover photograph: Newport Chinese Community Project. Courtesy of the Big Lottery Fund

Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 6

1.1. The People and Places Programme ..................................................................................... 6

1.2. The Evaluation ................................................................................................................... 6

1.3. Structure of the report ....................................................................................................... 7

2. Synopsis of the findings of previous reports ................................................................. 8

2.1. 2008 and 2009 Annual Reports (year 1 and 2 reports) ........................................................ 8

2.2. 2010 Annual Report (year 3 report) .................................................................................. 10

3. Programme level analysis ............................................................................................ 12

3.1. Measuring outcomes: the indicators ................................................................................ 12

3.2. Sample ............................................................................................................................. 16

3.3. A little bit of the theory .................................................................................................... 19

3.4. Skills and abilities ............................................................................................................. 21

3.5. Well-being ....................................................................................................................... 24

3.6. Relationships between groups and greater participation within the community ............... 27

3.7. Local services and facilities ............................................................................................... 28

3.8. The quality of the local physical and natural environment & individual’s pro-environmental

behaviour .................................................................................................................................... 30

4. Case studies: project level analysis ............................................................................. 32

4.1. Tabernacl Building Project ................................................................................................ 33

4.2. War Memorial Park: Children’s Play Area Project ............................................................. 43

4.3. For a Better Community ................................................................................................... 51

5. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 59

Appendix 1: Sample demographic data .............................................................................. 60

Appendix 2: Bibliography ................................................................................................... 62

Evaluation of the People and Places programme: 2011 Annual Report

©Copyright Wavehill Ltd. 2011 Page | 1

Executive Summary

People and Places was launched in November 2005 and is the largest of the current programmes

being delivered by the Big Lottery Fund (hereafter referred to as BIG) in Wales. Its aim is to enable

people to work together for strong communities, social justice and better rural and urban

environments. The three key programme outcomes are:

• Revitalised communities

• Improved community relations

• Enhanced local environment, community services and buildings

The programme is open to applications from voluntary, community and public organisations

representing geographical communities and communities of interest. As of December 2011, the

programme had awarded 423 grants, with a total value of £93,430,691.

BIG commissioned Wavehill to evaluate People and Places between 2007 and 2012; this is the 2011

and fourth Annual Report. The main report includes a very brief summary of the main findings of all

the previous reports. Since 2010, the evaluation has focused on undertaking in-depth research with

a small but representative (in terms of region, value and type of project) sample of projects

supported by the programme. Twenty four projects will participate in the evaluation between 2010

and 2012; eight per year. The findings in this report should only therefore be considered as interim

or ‘emerging’ based on the research with the first sixteen projects; more information will be

collected during 2012.

To date, one hundred and eighty five beneficiaries and volunteers have contributed to the

evaluation via the sixteen projects engaged (referred to in the discussion below as ‘respondents’).

This includes one hundred and forty six beneficiaries of the projects (including ninety ‘proxy’

interviews1) and thirty nine people who are involved in the management or delivery of a project in

some capacity (volunteers - excluding employed staff). It is important to note that the interviews for

the evaluation take place via the People and Places funded projects and so the interviews only

represent the views of people who are more naturally inclined to get involved with volunteering,

community groups and probably have a high level of social capital. The findings need to be

considered in this context. The outcomes being identified are also those perceived by the volunteers

and beneficiaries that we have spoken with.

Some theory

Many of the findings and outcomes of People and Places projects discussed are related to the

concept of social capital. Broadly, social capital is the idea that access to and participation in groups

can benefit individuals and communities – social networks have value. This is the most obvious

impact of People and Places projects identified by the evaluation to date.

1 Proxy interviews are those undertaken with individuals who were responding on behalf of the actual beneficiary of the

support provided if they themselves could not be interviewed; for example, the parents or guardians of children.



The indicators

There is no set definition of the three key programme outcomes noted above. One of the tasks for

the evaluation was therefore to ‘define’ the programme level outcomes or, in other words, to

identify a series of indicators that could be used to demonstrate whether or not the programme was

achieving those three key outcomes. Six indicators have been developed and are being used by the

evaluation:

1. Skills and abilities

2. Well-being

3. Relationships between groups and greater & wider participation within the community

4. The perceived quality of local services and facilities

5. The quality of the local physical and natural environment

6. Individual’s pro-environmental behaviour

Skills and abilities

Respondents were asked whether or not they had developed any ‘life skills’; skills and abilities which

will improve the life of the individual in question2. The abilities that the greater number of

respondents identified were those relating to mixing with other and new people. Ninety two percent

(171/185) of respondents said that abilities to mix with other people had been improved and eighty

eight percent (162/185) said that the ability to mix with different people had improved.

Well-being

Sixty seven percent (124/185) of respondents said that their own physical well-being or that of the

individual or group they were responding on behalf of had improved due to a People and Places

project. Two main themes are apparent from the comments made to explain what had led to the

improvements:

• Greater participation in physical activity (via the development of a facility – e.g. a play park - or

provision of a service – e.g. a keep fit class at a facility ); and

• A change in attitude (i.e. more healthy behaviour on their part).

This is an example of how a range of different approaches are being used within People and Places

to achieve the same outcome. In terms of mental well-being eighty six percent (159/185) of

respondents or those they were responding on behalf of were more satisfied with life due to the

project.

2 This list is based on the definition of ‘life skills’ used by BIG’s ‘Life Skills project’ –

http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/prog_life_skills_project



Relationships between groups and greater / wider participation within the community

Eighty nine percent (159/185) of respondents said that the People and Places project with which

they were involved had changed how satisfied they felt with their neighbourhood / local area as a

place to live. Further:

• Ninety one percent (168/185) agreed that the project had helped them to feel like they belong

to something they would call a community;

• Eighty eight percent (163/185) agreed that the project had helped them make new friends in the

area;

• Eighty two percent (151/185) agreed that the project had helped them make better friends in

the local area; and

• Eighty one percent (149/185) agreed that the project had helped them make friends with people

they never thought they would ever be friends with.

Local services and facilities

Seventy six percent (141/185) of respondents said that, in their opinion, the range of local services

had been improved as a result of the People and Places project. Slightly less – seventy percent

(129/185) - said that the quality of local services had been improved.

The quality of the local physical and natural environment

Of the sample as a whole, forty two percent (77/185) said that the project improved the physical

environment in the local area. Less – thirteen percent (24/185) - identified an improvement in the

local natural environment although ten percent identified the improvement as being significant.

However, it is important to take into account that the outcome of improving the quality of the local

physical and natural environment is not applicable to all People and Places funded projects. If we

only look at the projects within the sample that included some element of physical and/or

environmental work, the total number of respondents is obviously much less (eighty eight) but a

higher percentage of those respondents identify a positive impact:

• Eighty four percent (74/88) said the physical environment in their local area had been improved,

sixty nine percent (61/88) identifying the change as being significant

• Twenty six percent (23/88) said the natural environment in their local area had been improved,

twenty percent (18/88) identifying the change as being significant

The perceived impact on the physical environment is still clearly more significant than the perceived

impact on the natural environment. However, this is not unexpected given the emphasis of the

projects on physical regeneration rather than ‘natural’ environmental enhancements.

Respondents were subsequently asked whether the physical and/or natural improvements had

changed the way they felt about the area, fifty eight percent (51/88) said that the improvements

made had changed the way they feel about the area. This suggests that there is a link between how

improvements that people perceive have taken place and their feelings towards the area.



Individual’s pro-environmental behaviour

Respondents were also asked whether there had been a change in their own ‘pro-environmental’

attitude or behaviour as a result of the project. If we again focus just on those projects which have

included elements of physical or natural regeneration the percentage of respondents who identified

a change was greater:

• Twenty seven percent (24/88) identified a positive change in their attitude; and

• Nineteen percent (17/88) identified a positive change in their behaviour.

The main reasons given when respondents were asked to explain why their attitudes had changed

was that they were now “more aware” of the local environment as a result of the project (13). The

main way in which respondents’ behaviour had changed was in terms of an increase in the amount

that they recycled (10).

What people said

• “It’s good. I can play football, play on the swing. It’s a lot better now, before you couldn’t do

anything, there was nothing there. I meet a lot of my friends there and I’ve met different people

there who come here on holiday. It is somewhere to go, something to do.” - Boy aged 9 years,

Aberffraw Playing Fields

• “My three children and I use the park every day, we walk there and they play there for hours

instead of them being cooped up in the house playing on computer games.” – User of the park,

Corwen War Memorial Park

• “The centre is available to anyone that wants to use it …any religion group, Welsh and English –

anyone at all. It is about being an inclusive community.” - Committee Member, Tabernacl

Building Project

• “We helped an elderly woman who lived alone, she was 96 years old and had lived in England

since 1977 but she did not speak any English and was very isolated. We visited her every night to

help her with her medication but the fire engine and paramedics were constantly being called to

her home. Living alone was too much for her so we helped to move her to a Chinese Residential

home in Birmingham. She is very happy there and we visit and phone her often.” – Project

Manager, Newport Chinese Community Centre

• “One of the key successes has been linking the project to the curriculum so for example instead of

learning about history just in the classroom the children did a WW2 project and got help from the

residents. This project has raised the profile of young people and older people in the community

and we have seen a marked improvement in children's behaviour, they have much more respect

for older people.” - Project Manager, Generations Hand in Hand

• “I don't hold him back now, I'm not frightened of him mixing as he can control his temper now,

before he was lashing out at anyone. Before he went to the comprehensive they were playing

rounders on the field and he sent a boy to hospital as he lashed out with the bat when something

had been said about him and hit the boy on the foot, now he wouldn't do something like that. I’m

more confident, I can hold my head up high, and I’m not ashamed now as his behaviour is one

hundred percent.” – Parent, Neath Port Talbot Children’s Inclusion Project



• “My partner and I are the only Nepalese people in Carmarthenshire, I felt quite isolated before

getting involved and now I do not feel as isolated as we have now developed friendships through

befriending and visiting service users in the home. One gentleman anticipates and waits for my

visit every week as he does not have many visitors and I do a little gardening there too. I have

learnt a lot about people who are disabled; it has given me an insight into how people cope with

their disabilities. I am retired and in receipt of Pension Credits and I wanted to contribute

something. I feel fulfilled doing this.” – Participant, Rural Challenge

• “The bus is my lifeline, I have now been coming to the hospice for twelve years and if it was not

for the bus I would no longer be coming and would be spending every day at home. It is a very

personal service here; all the staff are really friendly and approachable. After being diagnosed

with a brain tumour and after treatment I was unable to walk. Since coming to the hospice I

started walking three years ago for the first time and its getting better and better.” –

Beneficiary, Usk House Bus

Conclusion

It is important to take into account the fact that the work of the evaluation is ongoing and that

further projects will participate in the fieldwork in 2012. However, the evidence gathered to date

suggests that People and Places funded projects will (as a group) achieve positive outcomes against

each of the indicators that have been developed and, hence, the three key programme outcomes.

Most obviously, People and Places projects develop and create social networks. They build social

capital and in particular they help transform weak social capital into strong social capital which

improves the longer term prospects of people and communities.

People and Places projects are however achieving the same outcomes in different ways depending

on where and who they are working with. This is the crux of the demand led ethos of the

programme; applicants are given the opportunity to address key issues in their community in the

way that they deem is most appropriate. The findings of the evaluation to date suggest that the

approach is effective and that it is possible to achieve the same outcomes in a range of different

ways.

However, although the matter is not discussed in this report as not to repeat the discussion on the

2010 Annual Report3, one of the consequences of a demand led approach is the challenge of

ensuring that projects ‘fit’ with other ongoing activities in an area. The ‘external’ stakeholders (local

authorities, CVC’s, etc.) that we discussed People and Places projects with continue to express

concern on this matter. In particular, concerns continue to be expressed about how BIG take into

account the complementarily of the projects funded by People and Places with other projects in the

area. This is something that BIG needs to address to ensure that the resources that are available via

People and Places are being utilised as effectively as possible.

3 The 2010 Annual Report is published online: http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/er_people_places_annual_report_2010.pdf



1. Introduction

This is the fourth Annual Report for the evaluation of the People and Places Programme. It is being

conducted over a five year period by social research and evaluation specialists Wavehill in parallel

with the implementation of projects funded by the programme.

1.1. The People and Places Programme

People and Places was launched in November 2005 and is the largest of the current programmes

being delivered by BIG in Wales. Its aim is to enable people to work together for strong

communities, social justice and better rural and urban environments. The three key programme

outcomes are:




The programme is open to applications from voluntary, community and public organisations

representing geographical communities or communities of interest. Private organisations and

individuals may work in partnership with statutory, voluntary or community organisations. Projects

must benefit people in Wales or the Welsh environment.

The programme is split into three levels of grant:

• Grants between £5,001 and £250,000 for projects which meet one programme outcome;

• Grants between £250,001 and £500,000 for projects which meet all three programme outcomes;

• Strategic grants over £500,000 and up to £1 million for projects which meet all three programme

outcomes, are innovative and strategically important for Wales.

Awards are made for up to three years, with further funding considered only in specific

circumstances. As of December 2011, the programme had awarded 423 grants, with a total value of

£93,430,691.

1.2. The Evaluation

BIG has commissioned Wavehill to evaluate People and Places between 2007 and 2012 alongside the

delivery of the programme. Over the first two years, the evaluation largely focused on the process of

managing and delivering the People and Places programme. Since 2010, the focus has moved to

addressing the following questions:

• What has been the impact of People and Places projects on volunteers and beneficiaries? How

has this impact been achieved?

• Based on the collective impact of projects, what has been the impact of the People and Places

programme as a whole? Has the programme delivered its key outcomes?

• What has been the legacy of People and Places projects upon those organisations who delivered

the projects?

• What are the views of external stakeholders on the ‘fit’ of People and Places projects with local

strategies and priorities?



One hundred and eighty projects funded by People and Places participated in telephone interviews

or were visited by the evaluation team during 2008-2009. Since 2010, the fieldwork has been

focused on undertaking in-depth research with a small but representative (in terms of region, value

and type of project) sample of projects supported by the programme. Twenty four projects will

participate in the evaluation between 2010 and 2012; eight per year. The findings in this report

should only therefore be considered as interim or ‘emerging’ based on the research with the first

sixteen projects; more information will be collected during 2012.

1.3. Structure of the report

The remainder of this report is split into the following sections:

• Section 2 very briefly reviews the main findings of the evaluation to date;

• Section 3 collates and analyses the information that has been collected on a ‘programme wide’

basis;

• Section 4 presents a ‘project level’ analysis for three of the projects engaged by the evaluation

team in 2011; and

• Finally, Section 5 discusses the emerging findings of the evaluation.



2. Synopsis of the findings of previous

reports

The following summarises the main findings of the previous evaluation reports4 and provides context

for the 2011 report, which builds upon the previous year’s findings.

2.1. 2008 and 2009 Annual Reports (year 1 and 2 reports)

2.1.1. Identifying and addressing need within the community

• The evaluation found that the two main methods being used by applicants to identify the need

for a project were: ‘new research’ which explores the needs of the community and, the use of

evidence gathered by the applicant during the delivery of previous projects. One of the factors

that differentiated successful and unsuccessful applications was whether or not they were able

to provide evidence of having delivered projects in their application. In other words, applicants

that had delivered similar projects in the past would seem to be more likely to have an

application for People and Places funding approved.

• There was a concern that the appraisal process was too dependent on the evidence being

presented by the applicants, which will inevitably be biased towards supporting the need for the

project being presented for funding.

2.1.2. The application and appraisal process

• There was a general concern amongst stakeholders and some applicants that it is difficult for

smaller, less experienced, community groups to access People and Places funding. There is also

evidence to support this. For example, the majority of People and Places funding has supported

‘well established’ applicants. These are organisations that are likely to be more experienced in

terms of delivering projects and therefore – from a funder’s perspective - low risk. This is

important to any funder especially in a situation where the success of a programme is being

measured by the outcomes it generates.

• When discussing the type of support needed applicants highlighted a desire for additional direct

contact with BIG staff to discuss applications either on a one-to-one basis or via a training event

or workshop in order to fully understand BIG’s requirements.

• In 2008 and 2009, the feedback from applicants on the application process was generally

favourable; seventy two percent (116/161) of successful applicants rate the process as ‘good’ or

‘excellent’.

4 The 2010 Annual Report is published online:

http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/er_people_places_annual_report_2010.pdf

The 2009 Annual Report can be found here: http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/pp_2009_annual_report.pdf

The 2008 Annual Report in is available here: http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/pp2008_annual_report_final.pdf



2.1.3. Involvement by the local community and beneficiaries in projects

• Several benefits to involving the local community in the management and delivery of projects

were identified in 2008 and 2009. These include communities taking a greater ownership of

projects, improved learning about the needs of local people and project beneficiaries are

provided with opportunities to improve their practical skills and confidence. However, it is

important to be aware that these are perceived benefits and outcomes; they are the benefits

that the organisations and project managers interviewed believe that the involvement of the

community generates. The benefit from the perspective of the community and actual impact of

that benefit (i.e. the amount of benefit derived by projects) is currently being explored by the

evaluation.

2.1.4. Partnership working

• The most common benefit of partnership working identified by project managers was that

working in partnership improves the delivery of the project by, for example, bringing in

additional knowledge and skills. Other respondents made reference to the fact that working with

local partners improves a project’s ‘credibility’ whilst others stressed the need to develop

partnerships as a means of securing on-going funding for their projects; this was a key part of

their exit strategy.

2.1.5. Looking forward - the sustainability of projects

• Sixty one per cent (99/161) of the People and Places projects surveyed in 2008 and 2009

(combined) said that they would be seeking further grants to support their work when their

current funding ends. This clearly has implications for BIG given the considerable investment

that has, and is, being made in the organisations being supported.

• There is inevitably a risk that some of the benefit that the investment could generate, beyond

the lifetime of the project funded by People and Places, will be lost if the project is not

maintained in some way. There is also a risk that much of the capacity and expertise built up by

projects could be lost if the projects (or the services that they provide) are not sustained.



2.2. 2010 Annual Report (year 3 report)

2.2.1. The geographic distribution of grants and funding

• The evaluation found that a wide range of factors influence the geographic distribution of

People and Places grants and funding. But, the main factors were:

o The need for funding in the area; (i.e. the number of potential People and Places projects)

o The alternative funding that is available for projects in the area;

o The capacity of local organisations – particularly their ability to apply for grant funding;

o The availability of advice and support to potential applicants.

• BIG emphasised the fact that the capacity of organisations to deliver BIG funded projects is also

an important issue.

• The main implication of the findings for BIG is that it should not look at any factor in isolation

(e.g. the funding being spent in an area) when considering whether funding or their promotional

activities needs to be focused in any part of Wales in particular; a range of different factors need

to be taken into account.

2.2.2. The local ‘fit’ of projects

• The evaluation has identified a need to build stronger ‘strategic’ links between BIG and local

stakeholders. Stakeholders feel that they have a contribution to make in terms of reviewing the

‘fit’ of applications with local strategies and other ongoing developments in the area. Projects

funded by People and Places should not be delivered in isolation to other local developments.

2.2.3. Monitoring and evaluation

• The quality of the information that projects provided to the evaluation varied significantly. Some

projects were able to provide a wealth of information but others could only provide very basic

monitoring information. The evaluation recommended that projects should be told at the outset

what the minimum amount of information is that they should be collecting to support

evaluation activities.



2.2.4. The legacy of funding on the organisations that deliver projects

• Delivering a People and Places project generates a range of benefits for the delivery organisation

both in the short and long term. For example, it increases the range of services that they can

provide and improves their financial stability. There are also a number of less obvious benefits

such as organisations introduced improved management procedures in order to deal with the

increase in the range and volume of services that they are providing and increasing the local

profile of the delivery organisation.

• However, projects also need to plan for how they are going to deal with the problems that they

could face when the People and Places funding ends; for example, staff being made redundant.

This can have a serious impact on an organisation. Projects should therefore have clear ‘exit

strategies’ in place.

2.2.5. What the programme is achieving

• The 2010 report found that the projects funded by People and Places were having a positive

impact particularly by improving relationships between individuals and groups within the

community. This is further explored in this report.



3. Programme level analysis

Outcomes are what happen as a result of a project or programme. For example, the outcomes of

providing support to unemployed people might be:

Improved self-esteem and self-confidence;

• Improved motivation to find work;

• Gaining skills or qualifications; or

• Getting work.

This section of the report discusses the emerging findings from the research to explore the

outcomes of the projects funded by People and Places. It also considers the emerging evidence on

whether the programme will achieve its three key outcomes: ‘revitalised communities’, ‘improved

community relations’ and ‘enhanced local environment, community services and buildings’.

3.1. Measuring outcomes: the indicators

As discussed in greater detail in the 2010 Annual Report, there is no set definition of the three key

outcomes for People and Places:




Examples of what activity could be funded under each outcome are given in the guidance notes for

applicants but it is up to the applicant to define these outcomes as they relate to their ‘community’

and their project. This is part of the ‘demand led’ ethos of the Programme. From an evaluation

perspective, this creates a problem as it leads to a situation where each project is measuring what it

achieves in different ways and it is difficult to assess the ‘cumulative’ impact of the programme as a

whole. One of the tasks for the evaluation was therefore to ‘define’ the programme level outcomes

or, in other words, to identify a series of indicators that could be used to demonstrate whether or

not the programme was achieving those three key outcomes.

Initially, nine indicators were developed but these were subsequently amalgamated into six:

1. Improvements to the skills and abilities of members of the community

2. Improvements to the well-being of members of the community

3. Improved relationships between groups and greater & wider participation within the community

4. Improvements to local services and facilities

5. Improvements to the quality of the local physical and natural environment

6. Improvements to individual’s pro-environmental behaviour

These indicators are fairly broad. The table that follows therefore breaks down each indicator into a

number of ‘sub-indicators’ which further define the main indicators. For example, ‘improvements to

the well-being of members of the community’ is broken down into physical and mental well being.



Table 1: Indicators, sub-indicators and questions

Indicator Sub-indicators Questions / evidence5

1. Improvements to the

skills and abilities of

members of the

community

The skills and abilities

developed:

• Ability to become involved

in community projects

• Life Skills

• Other skills

How those skills and abilities are

being used? (impact):

• Economic activity

• Education

• Volunteering

• Role within the community

Those managing the project (volunteers)

3.2 Had you been involved in the management of other projects before you became

involved with [PROJECT NAME]?

3.4 Are you now involved in the management of any other community projects?

All beneficiaries in the projects

4.1 Has the project / your involvement with the project helped to develop your ability to

do the following? (a) Live independently, (b) adopt healthy behaviours, (c) mix with other

people, (d) mix with different people, (e) communicate with other people effectively, (f)

develop thinking and learning skills, (g) fully participate in community life, (h) improve

your training and employment opportunities

4.2 Would you say that you’ve learned any other new skills due to your involvement

with this project? (open)

4.4 How, if at all, are you using the skills that you’ve developed?

4.5 Have the new skills that you developed helped you to do any of the following? Get a

job, get a better job, stay in education or training, move into education or training,

become a volunteer, do more volunteering, do different types of volunteering, become

involved in other community projects.

4.6 Have you taken on any new roles within the community since your involvement with

this project?

4.8 Would you have taken this role prior to your involvement with this project?

5 The numbers within this column relate to the relevant question number within the questionnaires used. They have been left in order to demonstrate the link between the indicators and the

questionnaires.





well-being of members of

the community

• Physical well-being

• Mental well-being

5.1 Would you say that [THE PROJECT] has improved your physical well-being?

5.4 Would you say that [THE PROJECT] has improved the physical well-being of local

children?

5.6 Would you say that [PROJECT NAME] changed how satisfied you feel with your life?

5.8 Would you agree or disagree with the following? The project / my involvement with

the project has helped me: (a) feel better about myself, (b) feel more optimistic about

the future, (c) deal with problems better, (d) think more clearly.

3. Improved relationships

between groups and

greater / wider

participation within the

community

• Skills and ability to build

relationships and participate

in the community

• Satisfaction with the local

area as a place to live

• Becoming more active

within the community

• A feeling of belonging to a

community

• Reduction of perceived

crime and anti-social

behaviour

4.1 Has the project / your involvement with the project helped to develop your ability to

do the following? (c) mix with other people, (d) mix with different people, (e)

communicate with other people effectively, (g) fully participate in community life

6.1 Would you say that [PROJECT NAME] changed how satisfied you feel with your

neighbourhood / local area as a place to live?

6.3 Would you disagree or agree with the following statements? The project / my

involvement with the project has helped me: (a) become more active within the local

community, (b) make new friends in the local area, (c) make friends with people I never

thought I would be friends with, (d) make better friends in the local area, (e) feel like I

belong to something I would call a community.

6.4 Has the project had an impact on crime and anti-social behaviour in the

neighbourhood?

6.6 Has the project reduced people’s fear of crime and anti-social behaviour in the

neighbourhood?

4. Improvements to local

services and facilities

• Range

• Quality

7.1 and 7.2 Would you say that [PROJECT NAME] has improved the range and quality of

services or facilities available in your local area?

7.3 Have local services been improved in any other way?


questionnaires.





quality of the local

physical and natural

environment

• The physical environment

• The natural environment

8.1 Would you say that [PROJECT NAME] has improved the local physical environment?

8.3 Would you say that [PROJECT NAME] has improved the local natural environment?

8.5 Have the improvements that have been made changed the way you feel about the

area?

8.7 Has the project improved your own attitude towards the local environment? Are you

now more aware of the local environment?

8.9 Has this resulted in changes in your behaviour relating to the environment?

6. Improvements to

individual’s pro-

environmental behaviour

• Knock-on impact on

personal environmental

views and behaviour

9.1 Has the project improved your own attitude towards the local environment? Are you

now more aware of the local environment?

9.3 Has this resulted in changes in your behaviour relating to the environment?


questionnaires.



3.2. Sample

3.2.1. Participating projects

Eight projects participated in the evaluation in 2011 described in Table 2 and combined with those

from 2010 brings the total sample / number of case studies to sixteen (Tables 2 and 3). As noted in

the introduction, a further eight projects will be engaged in 2012 bringing the total sample to twenty

four.

Table 2: Projects that participated in the 2011 round of fieldwork

Project Grant Description

Aberffraw Playing

Field

£61,600 The project was to provide leisure and sports facilities at a playing field

situated in the village of Aberffraw in Anglesey.

Prosiect Adeiladau'r

Tabernacl

£122,071 This project refurbished and extended 'Y Ganolfan' to create a

community facility for the village of Efail Isaf and a provision for the

Welsh speaking community of the surrounding villages.

Usk House

Community Bus

£121,532 The project was for a new minibus to collect and return day patients to

and from the Hospice and for day trips. This would allow patients to

access the hospice's support groups, cancer information and support,

complimentary therapy and any other new services the hospice has on

offer. In addition the bus was also made available to the local nursing

homes and dial-a-ride for trips. The three year grant paid for the twelve

seater mini bus and the existing salaries to the driver and two escorts.

Neath Port Talbot

Children's Inclusion

Project - CHiP

£943,232 The Children's Inclusion Project (CHIP) aimed to constitute a core team of

staff whose aim was to prevent offending and anti-social behaviour by

offering voluntary support to high risk 8-11 year olds and their families.

The main emphasis of the project's work was to ensure that children

received at the earliest opportunity, mainstream public services, together

with complementary interventions appropriate to their needs.

Generations Hand

in Hand

£49,982 This project was an intergenerational project to develop a piece of fallow

land in between a residential care home for older people and a Primary

School. The land consisted of allotment beds, walkways, a grassed

amphitheatre and paths. This allowed older people and children to

improve relations by cultivating plants together, providing opportunities

for interaction and performances.

For a Better

Community

£159,914 Provision of a drop-in facility to enable the Chinese Community to access

help/advice/support and signpost them to appropriate services

Rural Challenge £333,774 The project looked to support older people living in Powys,

Carmarthenshire, Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire. The Rural Challenge

coordinators aimed to publicise the scheme and then identify, train and

offer support to older people who wished to offer their time to act as

volunteers within projects of benefit to the wider local community in

these four rural counties.

War Memorial Park

Childrens Play Area

Project

£81,057 The project was to totally revamp and replace the children's play area

equipment (i.e. swings, roundabouts etc.) and provide a picnic/seating

area at Corwen War Memorial Park, Denbighshire.



Table 3: Projects that participated in the 2010 round of fieldwork

Project Grant Description

Llanfechain

Memorial Hall Re-

development

£244,018 The project extended and refurbished the village hall in Llanfechain,

Powys in order to provide improved and additional community space in

addition to a community shop and post office.

Community Play

Project (Saltney

Ferry, Flintshire)

£125,409 The project developed a local recreational area to provide a refurbished

play area, multi-use games area and garden and seating area. It was

designed to provide a facility for informal and organised play

opportunities and encourage volunteering in the community.

All About Eve £218,579 This project provided support for young women living in Cwmafan, South

Wales. The young women were supported to organise events,

workshops, social events and activities for other young women. The grant

funded the salaries of one new and one existing Youth Worker and two

new Childcare Workers. It will also fund costs relating to the training of

staff and volunteers, contract staff, resources and materials, participation

costs, activities, trips and crèche resources.

Changing Lifestyles £355,667 The project provided support, advice and help for people with learning

disabilities in Rhondda Cynon Taff to lead healthier lifestyles. Participants

took part in designing accessible information on health, employment,

housing and the environment, raising awareness in the wider community

of the issues affecting them and accessing training to overcome barriers

which may prevent their use of appropriate services and facilities in the

community. The grant over three years was for staff costs, support costs,

training, publicity and volunteers expenses.

Tackling Pensioner

Poverty through

Financial Inclusion

Activities

£241,587 This project provided an accessible financial service for older people. It

had two complementary elements: maximisation and the effective

management of financial resources. It was designed to address

pensioner poverty at an individual level and contribute to the economic

prosperity and regeneration of the local community. The grant was used

to employ a co-ordinator and administration assistant, pay for volunteer

expenses, promotion, running expenses and overheads.

Reel Progress £210,000 This project built on a scheme previously funded by BIG and provided a

cinema club for the 5-11 year old children based in communities in

Merthyr Tydfil. The enhancement on the previous project was the

introduction of taster sessions in lifestyle issues (e.g. confidence, coping

with stress, healthy lifestyles and encouraging learning). The project also

extended to providing shows for senior citizens. The grant employed

three staff, paying for training and associated running costs.

Sarn Helen

Community Garden

£247,877 This project had three distinct phases only one of which was funded by

People and Places. Phase one was to create a learning garden in the land

surrounding an existing workshop. Phase two then revived disused

allotments and created a community garden to supply fresh inexpensive

products. Finally, phase three will be a partnership project to build

workshops to house the Dulais Valley Partnership's Countryside Warden

Scheme and serve as a shop front and workshop for the community

garden. The People and Places grant was spent on taking forward Phase

two by employing two workers, funding start-up and revenue costs to

purchase plants, seeds, fertilizers, tools and equipment, volunteer

expenses, marketing and disseminating of the project.

Development of

the Community

Centre at

Llanfihangel-ar-

Arth

£55,700 This project was to develop existing and new activities at the School Hall

in the village of Llanfihangel-ar-Arth in Ceredigion. The grant was used to

create the new part-time post of ‘Centre Organiser’ and also covered

recruitment costs, activities costs and staff expenses.



3.2.2. Volunteers and beneficiaries

A total of one hundred and eighty five volunteers and beneficiaries have now contributed to the

evaluation. This includes one hundred and forty six beneficiaries of the projects (including ninety

‘proxy’ interviews – see below) and thirty nine people (volunteers) who are involved in the

management or delivery of a project in some capacity (excluding employed staff). A breakdown of

the demographic data for those interviewed can be found in Appendix 1.

Table 4: Distribution of interviews amongst the projects

Project Interviews

20

11

Aberffraw Playing Field 15

Generations Hand in Hand (Blaengwawr Primary School) 6

Tabernacle Building Project 29

Corwen War Memorial Park Children’s Play Area Project 21

For a Better Community (Chinese Community Centre) 33

NPT Children’s Inclusion Project (CHIPS) 16

Rural Challenge 5

Usk House Community Bus 11

20

10

All About Eve 13

Changing Lifestyles 10

Community Play Project 3

Development of the Community Centre, Llanfihangel-ar-Arth 8

Llanfechain Memorial Hall Re-development 10

Reel Progress 5

Sarn Helen Community Garden 15

Tackling Pensioner Poverty through Financial Inclusion Activities 0

A ‘mixed method’ approach was used to collect data from beneficiaries and volunteers which is a

reflection of the range of people involved in People and Places projects. This included telephone

interviews, one-to-one interviews during a visit to projects, postal questionnaires and focus groups.

The research team collected ‘free speech’ quotes from beneficiaries and volunteers from the

informal discussions during visits to projects.

It should be noted that a proportion (forty nine percent) of the interviews were what researchers

would describe as ‘proxy’ interviews; interviews with individuals who were responding on behalf of

the actual beneficiary of the support provided if they themselves could not be interviewed. For

example, proxy interviews could be undertaken with the parents or guardians of children or those

working with people with learning disabilities being supported by a project. It is of course preferable

in most circumstances to collect data directly from beneficiaries of projects. However, this is not

always possible and, rather than exclude those groups from research, it is preferable to undertake

proxy interviews. In some circumstances, it may also be preferable to undertake proxy interviews.

For example, those who have regular contact with beneficiaries may be able to identify changes in

their life or behaviour which may not be clear to the beneficiaries themselves.

It is also important to note that the interviews for the evaluation take place via the People and

Places funded projects and so the interviews only represent the views of people who are more

naturally inclined to get involved with volunteering, community groups and probably have a high

level of social capital. The findings need to be considered in this context.



3.3. A little bit of the theory

Most of the remainder of this chapter of the report explores the evidence that has been gathered to

date against each of the indicators previously introduced starting with the skills and abilities of

volunteers and beneficiaries of the projects. However, this section very briefly discusses some of the

academic research that explains how and why people benefit from the type of projects supported by

the People and Places Programme.

3.3.1. Impact on people - social capital

Many of the findings and outcomes of People and Places projects discussed in this report are related

to the concept of social capital. Understanding social capital can therefore help us understand why

some of these outcomes are important. Broadly, social capital is the idea that access to, and

participation in, groups can benefit individuals and communities – social networks have value.

Whereas physical capital (e.g. owning a car) and human capital (e.g. achieving qualifications) are

often recognised as advantages to individuals and communities, the value of social relations can

easily be overlooked.

Academics have identified two types of social capital8; bonding and bridging capital both of which

are apparent as outcomes of People and Places projects. Bonding capital relates to the strength of

relationships and groups within communities and the support this provides to people. Examples

could include sports clubs or the Newport Chinese Community Centre visited by the evaluation team

in 2011. These groups can provide both social and psychological support. Bridging capital refers to

social networks that look outward and encompass people from different communities and

backgrounds. Bridging capital may, for example, provide an individual with contacts which then lead

to them gaining employment; many people get jobs because of who they know, not what they know.

Overall then, bonding social capital is good for “getting by” whereas bridging social capital is crucial

for “getting ahead”.9

Another of the distinctions within social capital of relevance to People and Places projects is ‘weak’

and ‘strong’ capital10

. Weak capital refers to social relations and networks which, whilst being

important, are temporary and / or contingent. This is in contrast to strong social capital: which is

permanent (repeatable) and stable. Any projects or outcomes that help transform weak social

capital into strong social capital can therefore be seen as improving the longer term prospects of

people and communities. Again, there is evidence to suggest that People and Places projects can

help this to happen.

Finally, social capital has also been identified as a key influence on a number of vulnerable groups in

society; for example, young people. Research11

has suggested that deficiencies in social capital, such

as a lack of interaction between adults (and especially parents) in local communities, is detrimental

to development in adolescence.

8 Putnam 2000

9 Putnam 2000, p.23

10 Heffron 2000

11 Coleman and Hoffer, 1987



3.3.2. Impact on places - environmental justice

“Poor communities often get penalised twice. Not only do they have to live with fewer

economic resources, they often - indeed almost always - live in environments which exact an

additional toll on their well-being” Worpole (2000, p.9).

Environmental justice is the right of everyone to enjoy and benefit from a safe and healthy

environment, regardless of race, class, gender of ethnicity. It is an important concept as it helps us to

place and understand the significance of improvements to local environments and the reasons these

are needed in the first place.

There are two main strands of environmental justice research that are of relevance to People and

Places. The first relates to environmental ‘bads’. Environmental bads can be as diverse as air quality

and dog fouling; environmental influences that have a negative impact on people’s quality of life and

health. Secondly, there is work on environmental ‘goods’. This work has looked at the availability of

environmental resources (such as access to green space) and access to the decision making process

associated with environmental policy and change. As with environmental bads, research has

identified that these resources are unevenly and unjustly distributed in society12

; it is easier to

access environmental goods in some areas just as it’s more likely that you’re exposed to

environmental bads in some areas.

A number of studies have suggested bad local environments are among the most significant factors

in determining residents’ dissatisfaction with the place in which they live. For example, research has

found that what may be considered relatively ‘minor’ local environmental problems, such as dog

fouling, waste and litter, were top of residents’ concerns13

. Improvements to local environments and

resources can therefore reduce some of the environmental injustices felt by people and

communities. Often this includes local people getting involved in change and the decision making

processes themselves, leading to a sense of empowerment and ownership of the area.

12

Kosek, J. 2010 13

Burningham and Thrush 2001



3.4. Skills and abilities

Respondents were asked whether or not they had developed any ‘life skills’; described as skills and

abilities which will improve the life of the individual in question14

. The abilities that the greater

number of respondents identified as having been developed were those relating to mixing with

other and new people; ninety two percent (171/185)15

of respondents said that the ability to mix

with other people had been improved and eighty eight percent (162/185)16

said that their ability to

mix with different people had improved.

The majority of respondents also identified a positive benefit on their ability to:

• Participate in community life: eighty four percent (155/185)

• Communicate with other people: seventy four percent (137/185)

• Adopt healthy behaviour: seventy two percent (133/185)

• Thinking and learning skills: seventy percent (129/185)

Mix with other people / Mix

with different people/

Communicate with other

people

• “It is like a meeting place now, having the picnic tables and

benches are brilliant as we can sit, catch up and watch the

children playing safely.”

• “People that did not come to the old building now attend the

coffee mornings.”

Participate in community life • “It has made it easier to integrate.”

• “The whole project is about fully participating in community

life.”

Adopt healthy behaviour • “It (the vestry) can get everyone together to discuss issues like

healthy eating etc.”

• “My three children and I use the park every day, we walk there

and they play there for hours instead of them being cooped up

in the house playing on computer games.”

Thinking and learning skills • “The children we take there from nursery and my own children

are learning to play independently as it is so safe there and in

groups as there is always other kids there.”

• “Through classes and we have better facilities like internet, TV

etc.”

14

This list is based on the definition of ‘life skills’ used by BIG’s ‘Life Skills project’ –

http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/prog_life_skills_project 15

Seventy three of these were proxy respondents. 16

Sixty four of these were proxy respondents.



The abilities that the least number of respondents identified as having been developed were:

• Training and employment opportunities: thirty eight percent (70/185)

• The ability to live independently: thirty five percent (64/185)

Live / function independently

• “It allows young people to increase their confidence by getting

along with others.”

• “Encourages older members of the community to socialise.”

Training and employment

opportunities

• “I have learnt a hell of a lot more about computers since using

them here.”

• “The classes and training provided by the project improve my

skill and employable ability, this gives me better opportunities.”

The fact that these outcomes are less common is probably a reflection of the type of projects

supported by People and Places which, on the whole, are not targeting such outcomes; essentially

they could therefore be described as unintended or unexpected outcomes. However, there are

examples, of those outcomes being generated.

As discussed in greater detail in the next section of the report, the ‘For a Better Community’ project,

delivered by the Newport Chinese Community Centre was one of the projects where a comparatively

high number of respondents identified ‘training and employment opportunities’ and the ability to

‘live or function independently’ was highest. In that example, the project was targeting a group of

the community who had barriers that they needed to overcome before they could live

independently within the community (most notably language barriers). The training and

employment opportunities were being generated as a ‘by-product’ of the training events that were

held at or organised by the project supported by People and Places.

3.4.1. Using the skills and abilities developed

A high proportion of respondents were unable to identify ways in which the skills and abilities

developed via the People and Places project were being used (figure 1). Wavehill would speculate

that this is probably a reflection of the type of skills and abilities developed which are mostly related

to mixing with people and participating in the community. However, another explanation is that the

impact of the skills developed has not yet become apparent.

It does suggest that there might be evidence of a ‘vocational’ impact - supporting beneficiaries to

stay in education, move into training or gain employment - although the percentage identifying

those outcomes is less than those identifying ‘social’ outcomes (figure 1). The most obvious example

amongst the projects that participated in the evaluation in 2011 is the Children's Inclusion Project

(CHIP); funding for a core team of staff aiming to prevent offending and anti-social behaviour by

offering voluntary support to at risk 8-11 year olds and their families in the Neath Port Talbot area.



The three ‘uses’ most commonly identified related to volunteering suggesting that People and Places

projects can lead to an ongoing (or additional) benefit within the community (figure 1). Again, this is

probably due to the type of skills and abilities being developed. Twelve percent (22/184) of

respondents said that they had actually taken on a new role within the community since their

involvement with the People and Places project. Of those, seventeen said that they would not have

taken that role prior to their involvement with People and Places which demonstrates a direct link

between the People and Places project and the outcome in question.

Figure 1: Have the new skills that you developed helped you to do any of the following? (option

selected in response to survey question)

Total number of responses = 185

The roles they were undertaking were:

• Volunteer x 7

• Management of community shop x 2

• Sunday school x 2

• Chairman (of a community group) x 2

• Fundraising x 2

• Summer fair

• Campaign group

• Written bids

• Secretary (of a community group)

• Play scheme supervisor

• Helping a sub-group (of a community

group)

3%

4%

6%

7%

9%

14%

16%

17%

17%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Get a better job

Get a job

Move into education or training

Anything else

Become involved in other community projects

Stay in education or training

Do more volunteering

Become a volunteer

Do different types of volunteering



3.5. Well-being

The evaluation used questions developed by NEF (the New Economics Foundation) for BIG17

to

review the impact of People and Places projects on individual’s mental and physical well-being which

the UK Government Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) foresight review on

‘Mental Capital and Well-being’ (2008) defines as:

‘A dynamic state, in which the individual is able to develop their potential, work

productively and creatively, build strong and positive relationships with others and

contribute to their community.’

3.5.1. Physical well-being

Sixty seven percent (124/185)18

of respondents (or their proxy on their behalf) said that their

physical well-being had improved due to a People and Places project. The most prominent reasons

given by respondents to ask what had led to the improvement were:

• Playing outside / exercising in the fresh air x 29

• Joined a sports club x 21

• Exercise x 17

All of these relate to participating in physical activity as a result of the People and Places project. The

other reasons identified included physical benefits that were generated as a result of ‘lifestyle’

choices made by beneficiaries and volunteers:

• Confidence

• A healthy diet

• The chance to get out and about

• Routine

• Improved interaction with others

• It is a healthier facility (no dust)

• Gardening - a good way to keep fit

• Stopped drinking/smoking

• Understanding and control of illness

Two main themes are apparent from the comments made to explain what had led to the

improvements (please refer to Section 4):

• greater participation in physical activity (via the development of a facility – e.g. a play park - or

provision of a service – e.g. a keep fit class at a facility ); and

• a change in attitude (i.e. more healthy behaviour on their part).

This is an example of how a range of different approaches are being used within People and Places

to achieve the same outcome.

17

Well-Being Evaluation Tools: A Research and Development Project for the Big Lottery Fund by NEF (2008) 18

Of these sixty two were proxy interviews.



The following are examples of the comments made by respondents when interviewed by the

evaluation team:

Aberffraw Playing

Field

• “Local children have now got somewhere safe to play outside and there is a

good variety of equipment for them to use.”

• “We have now got somewhere nice to play with really good equipment in

it.”

Generations Hand

in Hand

• “With the development of the environmental area the children now have a

safe area of grass we can use for sports days instead of us having to use

the school yard or having to go somewhere else. The area is constantly in

use; the children are out there a lot and are also growing vegetables.”

3.5.2. Metal well-being

Eighty six percent (159/185)19

of respondents (or their proxy on their behalf) said that they were

more satisfied with life due to the project, fifty seven percent (105/185) saying that they were

significantly more satisfied.

A wide variety of comments were made when respondents were asked to explain their answer. The

most common were however:

• Increased self-confidence x 15

• Able to socialise more x 14

• Adding to sense of community x 13

• Made friends x 12

• Received support x 10

• Relax knowing children are safe x 10

As shown in Figure 2, respondents to the survey also stated that the People and Places funded

project had a positive impact on ‘personal feelings’ with sixty eight percent (125/185) reporting that

their participation in the project had helped them / proxies to feel better about themselves and sixty

one percent (114/185) to be more optimistic about the future. Furthermore, fifty seven percent

(105/185) believed that the project had helped them to deal with problems better and sixty percent

(111/185) said it had helped them think more clearly.

19

Sixty five of these were proxy interviews.



Figure 2: The project has helped me to… the percentage of respondents who agreed and strongly

agreed


The following are examples of the comments made by respondents:

Rural Challenge • “It has reduced my anxiety, it has given me a routine, I am having to do

things so I get out and do them even when I am not having a particularly

good day and it has restored my confidence and feelings of self worth.”

NPT Children’s

Inclusion Project

• “Her whole outlook has changed; she will now discuss things more

constructively.”

40%

36%33% 34%

28%25% 24%

26%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Feel better about

myself

Feel more

optimistic about

the future

Deal with problems

better

Think more clearly

Strongly agree

Agree



3.6. Relationships between groups and greater participation

within the community

Eighty nine percent (159/185) of respondents said that the People and Places project with which

they were involved had changed how satisfied they felt with their neighbourhood / local area as a

place to live; sixty two percent (111/185) describing the change as being significant.

The most common reasons given by respondents to explain the change were:

• The project brings community together x 25

• They made friends x 23

• Comfortable/great/bigger facility/facilities x 18

• They had a much safer place to go to x 11

This is an indication of the influence of ‘people’ and ‘places’ on the positive impact being identified

by volunteers and beneficiaries.

Figure 3 illustrates the responses when volunteers and beneficiaries (or their proxy on their behalf)

were asked to agree or disagree with a series of statements with regards to their relationships and

participation in the local community.

Figure 3: The project has helped me to… (option selected by respondents) – the percentage of

respondents who agreed and disagreed.


29%

37%

32%

31%

38%

46%

51%

49%

51%

53%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Become more active within the local

community

Make new friends in the local area

Make friends with people I never thought

I would be friends with

Make better friends in the local area

Feel like I belong to something I would

call a community

Agree

Strongly agree



The graph shows that:

• Ninety one percent (168/185) agreed that the project had helped them to feel like they belong

to something they would call a community;

• Eighty eight percent(163/185) agreed that the project had helped them make new friends in the

area;

• Eighty two percent (151/185) agreed that the project had helped them make better friends in

the local area; and

• Eighty one percent (149/185) agreed that the project had helped them make friends with people

they never thought they would ever be friends with.

These are clearly very positive results. However, as previously noted, it is important to take into

account that interviews were being undertaken with people who had participated in a People and

Places project. As such, there is inevitably some bias within the sample; for example they were

people who use the project because they wanted (or needed) to make new friends.


Generations Hand

in Hand

• “I like the fact that we can all have a relationship with each other and I

know now that old people aren’t nasty.”

NPT Children’s

Inclusion Centre

• “He is more confident to speak to people he has not met before and is able

to make friends better.”

Rural Challenge • “I am now out doing more in my local area and getting to know more

people.”

3.7. Local services and facilities

It is arguable whether improving a local service or facility is an ‘outcome’ in itself. Rather, it is an

output which is achieved with a view to generating a subsequent outcome. For example, the

renovation of a village hall will lead to an increase in the number of social opportunities within the

community. This will then lead to some of the ‘life skills’ outcomes discussed previously. However,

enhancing community services and buildings is a specified key outcome of People and Places (key

outcome 3). The evaluation therefore explored whether beneficiaries and volunteers perceived that

the project had led to (a) improvements in the range of services available locally and/or (b)

improvements in the quality of the services available locally.

Seventy six percent (141/185) of the sample as a whole said that, in their opinion, the range of local

services had been improved – sixty three percent (117/185) identifying the improvement as being

significant. Slightly less – seventy percent (129/185) - said that the quality of local services had been

improved. Again, a high proportion – sixty percent (111/185) - identified the improvement as being

significant.



As is apparent from the project specific analysis in the following section, not all projects are however

applicable to this outcome; they are not designed to address key outcome three. If we take out the

respondents who could not respond to the question as it was not perceived to be applicable to their

project, the response is even more positive:

• Ninety three percent (141/152) said that the range of local services had been improved (seventy

seven percent identifying the improvement as being significant)

• Ninety percent (129/143) said that the quality of local services had been improved (seventy

eight percent identifying the improvement as being significant)


Aberffraw Playing

Field

• “The community now has a really nice play area for the children and

seating for parents/grandparents.”

Generations Hand

in Hand

• “A new community amenity has been provided and will be used for years to

come”

USK House • “The bus enables patients to get out of the house, they socialise, access

treatments and advice.”



3.8. The quality of the local physical and natural environment &

individual’s pro-environmental behaviour

3.8.1. Perceived improvements to the local area

Of the sample as a whole, forty two percent (77/185) said that the project improved the physical

environment in the local area. The following were the most common reasons identified when asked

to explain their answer:

• By developing a well-designed and safer park x 19

• By improving how the area looks x 18

• By making use of what was previously ‘wasteland’ x 12

• By improving a building x 9

Less – thirteen percent (24/185) - identified an improvement in the local natural environment

although ten percent identified the improvement as being significant. The most common reasons

they gave to explain their answer were:

• By attracting wildlife x 4

• By improving the building x 4

• Through thoughtful use of materials/plants to landscape x 4

However, we again need to take into account that the outcome of improving the quality of the local

physical and natural environment is not applicable to all People and Places projects. If we only look

at the projects within the sample that included some element of physical and/or environmental

work, the total number of respondents is obviously much less (eighty eight) but a higher percentage

of those respondents identify a positive response:

• Eighty four percent (74/88) said the physical environment in their local area had been improved,

Sixty nine percent (61/88) identifying the change as being significant

• Twenty six percent (23/88) said the natural environment in their local area had been improved,

twenty percent (18/88) identifying the change as being significant

The perceived impact on the physical environment is still clearly more significant than the perceived

impact on the natural environment. However, this is not unexpected given the emphasis of the

projects on physical regeneration rather than ‘natural’ environmental enhancements (please refer to

Section 4).



3.8.2. Feelings towards the area

Respondents were subsequently asked whether the physical and/or natural improvements had

changed the way they felt about the area, fifty eight percent (51/88) said that the improvements

made had changed the way they feel about the area. This suggests that there is a link between how

improvements that people perceive have taken place and their feelings towards the area. The

comments made most often when respondents were asked to explain their answer related to:

• It being a “nicer area” because of the work undertaken x 13

• A general ‘improvement’ to the area or it being ‘tidied up’ x 8

• It being perceived to be a safer place to visit because of the work undertaken x 7

3.8.3. Pro-environmental attitude and behaviour

Respondents were also asked whether there had been a change in their own ‘pro-environmental’

attitude or behaviour as a result of the project. For the sample as a whole, thirteen percent (24/185)

identified a positive change in their attitude and nine percent (17/185) identified a change in their

actual behaviour. However, if we focus just on those projects which have included elements of

physical or natural regeneration the percentage of respondents who identified a change was

greater:

• Twenty seven percent (24/88) identified a positive change in their attitude; and

• Nineteen percent (17/88) identified a positive change in their behaviour.

The main reason given when respondents were asked to explain why their attitude had changed was

that they were now “more aware” of the local environment as a result of the project (thirteen). A

few respondents (four) also said that their attitude had changed as they were now responsible for

looking after the building that had been improved. The main way in which respondents’ behaviour

had changed was in terms of an increase in the amount that they recycled (ten).



4. Case studies: project level analysis

This section of the report sets out the findings of the evaluation individually for three of the projects

that participated in the evaluation in 2011. Essentially, it follows the same structure used in the

previous section of the report to review the findings for the programme as a whole but on a project

basis. Whilst there is some reference to the ‘project level’ outcomes that were agreed with BIG

when the project was approved, the focus is on whether and how the project has achieved the

programme level outcomes for People and Places.



4.1. Tabernacl Building Project

4.1.1. Project overview

Project delivered by Capel Y Tabernacl Cyf

Start and end date September 2009 to September 2010

Value of People and Places

grant

£122,071

Programme level outcomes

to be achieved by the project

• Key outcome 1: Revitalised communities

• Key outcome 3: Enhanced local environment, community

services and buildings

Agreed project level

outcomes

• Provide increased opportunities for people to socialise and

network with eighteen groups and three hundred individuals

using the hall on a regular basis by June 2012.

• A minimum of fifty people will state that they have improved

their skills by October 2012.

• Half of the user groups will state that there is better

understanding and co-operation between different generations

by November 2012.

• By December 2012 a minimum of sixty five percent of those

questioned will state that the village is a better place to live.

• Reduction in the running costs of the hall and energy costs by

December 2012 and the annual accounts will show no financial

loss.

• Half of the user groups will state that by 2011 the organisation

has succeeded in providing a multi-purpose facility for the

Welsh community in the locality.

This project was to refurbish and extend the chapel vestry to create a

community facility for the village of Efail Isaf and for the Welsh speaking

communities of the surrounding villages. Efail Isaf is situated between

Llantrisant and Pontypridd. The vestry is near the chapel, however, is

detached from the chapel itself. The project provided a new roof; additional

meeting rooms; disabled access and indoor toilets; new windows; doors

and kitchen facilities.

The village is predominantly a Welsh speaking area with approximately two

thousand five hundred residents. The population of the area is largely

retired people and with poor public transport social isolation is a problem.

The village has two pubs and one village hall that consists of one large

room, a small kitchen and toilets.

Users of the refurbished

facility at Capel y

Tabernacyl (photo provided

by BIG)



Prior to the project the vestry was in poor repair with damp throughout the building and the existing

toilet facilities were located outside, some distance from the building. The new vestry, which opened

to users in September 2010, is available seven days a week with an estimation of over three hundred

regular users per week at the present time and is host to groups such as Cruse, Adult Learning

courses, choirs and a Welsh youth group. In addition to the three hundred regular users there is

approximately a further two hundred occasional users per week.

The total cost of the refurbishment was in excess of £400,000, £122,071 funded by People and

Places, with the remainder funded by the Welsh Government and the Tabernacle Chapel. The People

and Places grant was used for building costs and professional fees.

4.1.2. Fieldwork undertaken

The research team visited Capel Y Tabernacl on the 24th

May 2011 and undertook interviews with a

variety of users who had been invited to the venue specifically for our visit. The team also undertook

a number of house to house interviews (eight in total) in the local village to gain a ‘non-user’

perspective. In addition, we spoke to five of the committee members and a number of individuals

who were involved as volunteers in the project.

4.1.3. Skills and abilities

Figure 4: Response to the question – Has the project / your involvement with the project helped to

develop your ability to do the following? (options provided as part of the question) Proxy and non-

proxy interviews undertaken


Figure 4 shows the number of respondents who said yes when asked whether the project had

helped to develop any of a range of different ‘life skills’. It also differentiates between those who

identified the impact of the project as having been significant (the blue part of the column).

2

4

14

12

8

6

8

2

3

7

4

5

5

7

3

Live independently?

Adopt healthy behaviours?

Mix with other people?

Mix with different people?

Communicate with other people effectively?

Develop thinking and learning skills?

Fully participate in community life?

Improve your training and employment

opportunities?

Yes, significantly Yes



A high number of respondents identified positive impacts in terms of mixing with other people and

different people, the majority identifying the impact as being significant. There is also a high

perceived impact on respondent’s ability to fully participating in community life, communicating

with other people and developing thinking and learning skills.

The perceived benefit is less significant in terms of participant’s ability to live independently or

adopt healthy behaviour probably due to the nature of the activities being undertaken at the vestry

to date.

The following are examples of the comments that were made when respondents were asked to

explain how the project helped them or beneficiaries of the vestry to develop those abilities

identified:

Adopt healthy behaviour • “It (the vestry) can get everyone together to discuss issues like

healthy eating etc.”

• “Educate us on different aspects of life.”

Mix with other people /

different people /

communicate with other

people

• “That is the aim of the Sunday school.”

• “It is a friendly environment.”

• “We worked very closely together, depending on and relying on each

other.”

• “We have people from different villages who come together.”

• “More opportunity to socialise because more families use the facility,

but it is early days because the centre has only been open since

September 2010.”

• “People that did not come to the old building now attend the coffee

mornings.”

• “There is a lot of different groups using the vestry, we are English

and we mix with the Welsh.”

• “Good to add to conversations in English and Welsh, good for me to

get involved in something different.”

Participate in community

life

• “Young people can communicate in Welsh.”

• “Social evenings.”

• “The whole project is about fully participating in community life.”

• “Meet and get to know a lot of different people and meet a different

group of people, a lot of the coffee morning people are widowers

and it is a chance for them to socialise and talk to people.”

Develop thinking and

learning skills

• “Through classes and we have better facilities like internet, TV etc.”

• “With a pool of people like this if you have a problem then someone

will come up with a solution.”

• “Different organisations doing talks stimulates learning.”

• “New skills in voluntary capacity.”



Training and

employment

opportunities

• “University groups coming here.”

• “I have learnt a hell of a lot more about computers since using them

here.”

• “Learning to become a volunteer is training and this could lead to

employment.”

Live Independently • “Groups on a Wednesday and a Sunday for older people.”

• “It allows young people to increase their confidence by getting along

with others.”

• “Encourages older members of the community to socialise.”

• “If people are training to be a counselling volunteer then I think it

does help them to live more independently through helping others.”

The comments made illustrate the fact that projects such as Capel Y Tabernacl generate outcomes

for those who participate in a project via its management (in this case as committee members) as

well as for the ‘traditional’ beneficiaries of projects – those who use the vestry.

Four respondents identified ways in which they were now using the skills and abilities that they had

developed via the project, all three of whom had been involved with the management of the

project:

• “Me and the other committee members have benefited because working on this has instilled

communication skills in us and we learnt a lot about forming a company.”

• “In the future I am likely to be involved with the development of the chapel again”

• “I now do some fundraising for the youth group”

• “Greater involvement with the local community has allowed me to network far more effectively”

All four also said that they were doing more volunteering, different types of volunteering and getting

involved in other community projects as a result of their involvement with the redevelopment of the

vestry. Although the sample is small, this suggests that becoming involved in a project such as the

redevelopment of the local vestry does lead to individuals taking a more active role within their

community. This is supported by the fact that, of the nine interviewees who had been involved in

the management of the project, it was the first time five had such involvement in a community

project.

In addition to the skills mentioned in Figure 5, the research team also asked respondents if they had

learnt any other new skills as a result of the project; twenty eight of the twenty nine interviewed

said they had. Examples of additional skills learnt:

• Bid writing

• Project management

• Dealing with different people with different ideas

• Organisational skills

• Report writing

• Team working



Figure 5: Response to the question – Have the new skills that you have developed helped you to do

any of the following? (options provided as part of the question) Proxy and non-proxy interviews

undertaken


Nine respondents said that their involvement with this project has encouraged them to do different

types of volunteering, eight saying the project enabled them to do more volunteering and seven

saying they now were volunteering for the first time as a result of their involvement with this

project. The seven respondents who have taken on new roles in the community as a result of their

involvement with Capel Y Tabernacl were volunteering in a variety of different ways;

• Fundraising for the youth group

• Involved with the Summer fair

• Chair of the Church

• Volunteering at events held at the chapel

• Volunteering at the local primary school

• Leading Sunday School Class

4.1.4. Well-being

Seven of the respondents believed that the project had improved their own physical well-being, or

that of the users of the vestry. The following comments were made by those who identified a

positive impact:

• “I feel healthier for being involved ‘healthy body = healthy mind’"

• “It is a healthier facility, no dust, much more healthy.”

• “Makes us walk more to come here” x 2

• “I think a mental state of health also affects your physical well-being”

• “The young people walked 28 miles in the Bala area to raise money for NSPCC. They play games

in the new building and they also have a kick about in the local park”

• “Mentally it has helped stimulate the mind”

2

1

7

8

9

3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10



Become a volunteer



Become involved in other community projects



A greater number of respondents identified improvements to their mental well-being; or that of the

users of the vestry. Nineteen of the twenty nine perceived that the project had improved how

satisfied they felt with life, eight identifying the improvement as being significant.

• “Gets people out of the house and makes them more active.”

• “It has been a stimulus - nice to be part of something special in the community.”

• “People were living in a dormitory village.”

• “Feel much better having been involved in Teulu Twm, much happier socially.”

• “It has added another dimension, there is much more interaction now between the English and

Welsh congregation.”

• “It is good to know I can come here if I want to. A lot more people have got to know me and me

them.”

• “I think that training to be a volunteer will, in time, help people to feel more satisfied about how

they feel with their life.”

• “Chance to enjoy music, sing in a choir and take part in different discussions that stimulate the

mind.”

A group of respondents also felt that the project had a positive impact on either their ‘personal’

feelings or the feelings of the users of the vestry:

• eleven of the twenty nine said that it had helped them feel more optimistic about the future;

• ten said that it had helped them feel better about themselves;

• four said that had it helped them deal with problems better; and

• six said that had it helped them think more clearly.

4.1.5. Relationships between groups and greater / wider participation within

the community

Twenty five of the twenty nine respondents believed that their participation in the project had

improved how satisfied they felt, or the users of the vestry felt, with their neighbourhood as a place

to live; sixteen respondents identifying the change as being significant.

• “It strengthens the community and helps the future of the community”

• “I have come to know people, parents who do not speak Welsh”

• “It has only been established six months, no huge impact yet but very positive signs”

• “A great facility for the local people - a feeling of being part of something”

• “Created a place to sort things out”

• “Improve the area, nobody wanted to be in the old building”

• “More interaction with other members of the community”

• “One hundred percent better. It is a nice place to come to, very comfortable, very pleasant.

Tomorrow I am bringing an old lady here who is normally housebound as she is very frail but this

new building is fine for her.”

• “It is another feature to the village with good facilities” x2

• “It will improve the relationships with people in the village if there is something that everyone

wants to watch on TV then they can”

• “Because it has given us an extra facility to hold lots of different events, parking is no longer a

problem now as there is extra parking behind the village hall”



• “It has been a great example of how those members of the community have worked together to

achieve this outcome”

• “To look at it and to go in there it is marvellous in there now, big improvement”

• “Because it is here, because it is a nice vestry. The other building was old, this one is a bit more

classy looking in the village and we had Christmas dinners there”

• “Improved the overall look of the village and it is a good resource for the village”

Figure 6 illustrates interviewees’ responses when asked to agree or disagree with a series of

statements with regards to their relationships and participation in the local community. The

response is mainly positive in each instance but most positive in terms of respondents feeling that

they belong to something they would call a community, making new friends and becoming more

active in the community.

Figure 6: The project has helped me… (options provided within the question) Proxy and non-proxy

interviews undertaken

Total number of respondents: 29

8

5

5

4

11

9

13

10

12

12

9

6

9

8

3

2

4

4

4

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Become more active within the local

community

Make new friends in the local area

Make friends with people I never

thought I would be friends with

Make better friends in the local area

Feel like I belong to something I

would call a community

Disagree

No strong views

Agree

Strongly agree



4.1.6. Local services and facilities

All twenty nine of the respondents in the Capel Y Tabernacl project responded to the questions

about the project’s impact on local services. Twenty five said that the project had improved the

‘range’ of services available, twenty two of these people saying it had significantly improved the

range of services. Twenty six of the twenty nine interviewed also agreed that the ‘quality’ of services

had been improved, twenty five of these saying significantly.

When asked if the local services had been improved in any other ways, forty one percent (12/29)

answered yes;

• “I think the shop must have also benefited”

• “More communication between the local hall and the chapel”

• “Provision that was not available before and local training is now available”

• “We are able to invite people here now where as we couldn't before”

• “It has given older people in the village access to computers and to learn in a non intimidating

environment”

• “We have contributed to the car park over the road”

• “We did not have anything like this before, the village hall and this building complement each

other”

• “One hundred percent, it has given everyone in the area the opportunity to book it and there are

no limitations on who use it”

• “Local funerals using the chapel can now use the kitchen in the vestry for tea and coffee”

• “The facility is a good base for the future”

4.1.7. The local physical and natural environment & individual’s pro-

environmental behaviour

Twenty of the twenty nine respondents identified the improvements to the local area’s physical

improvement to be significant as a result of the project. Examples of the comments made include:

• “It looks much better”

• “The old building nearly closed down, it is great to see it now”

• “The whole place looks much better”

• “I think if it had not been done the building would have been demolished and would have

become an eyesore”

• “It looked dilapidated before, it is much tidier now”

• “The style and materials have followed traditional building techniques, using lime on the outside”

• “Modern, purpose built facility”

• “Architecture that matches the village well”



Eight respondents also identified the benefit to the local natural environment five of them as being

significant.

• “People are more proud, cutting of the grass and looking after the surrounding area is now a

priority”

• “Improved the borders and the side of the building”

• “There was some Japanese knot weed and we have got rid of all that now”

• “The approach is better, it used to be all overgrown but now it is tidy”

• “Kept original shape of building but modernised the interior”

Respondents were then asked a number of questions to explore whether the improvement to the

local environment had changed their personal attitude and behaviour relating to the local

environment. Four respondents were able to identify impacts in that respect:

• “Because we look after and respect the building”

• “More sensitive to the environment as a result of the project”

• “Taking pride in something”

• “Improvements to the look of the place has made the group think about environmental issues”

4.1.8. Legacy of the project

The People and Places grant was used to renovate the chapel vestry and, as such, ‘the project’ is

now completed. However, in many respects, the project will continue to generate benefits and

outcomes as the chapel vestry continues to be utilised. When the research team visited the project,

the new chapel vestry had only been open for six months, and so in terms of fully maximising its use,

it is still early days. The project managers told us that the chapel has a strong financial standing with

members contributing and therefore there is no pressure to create an income for the new vestry

meaning the users can utilise the facility free of charge.

Having said this, there are future revenue possibilities, for example the Welsh language soap opera,

Pobl Y Cwm use the grounds for their filming and pay a fee and there are other future groups that

may also incur charges for use of the new building.

The committee explained that they have many potential new groups for the centre, from a book

club starting in September to the possibility of having more ‘Fair Trade’ days. Their aim is to raise the

regular users from two hundred a week to two hundred and fifty a week in the next twelve months.

The committee also have future plans to link developments like an auditorium with the chapel to

allow a different use for this new building.



4.1.9. Conclusion

• “It has given a new lease of life to the community”

The above quote gives an indication of how the users of the new building feel about the finished

project. During our visit we also spoke to members of the community, some of which had not used

the new building yet and we got quite a mixed response. Some of the ‘non-users’ felt it had

benefited the community even though they themselves had not used it. However, there were some

‘non-users’ that believed the new building was more targeted at Welsh speakers than English

speakers. One of the committee members was very clear about the new building being available to

everyone;

• “The centre is available to anyone that wants to use it …any religion group, Welsh and

English – anyone at all. It is about being an inclusive community.” - Committee Member

The impression the research team had throughout the visit would have to concur with the statement

above. We met many users, both English and Welsh speaking, and everyone who had actually used

the new building was very happy with it. The committee members recently undertook a leaflet drop

in the village extending an invitation to the whole community to make use of the facilities and to

encourage them to launch an activity there. This might encourage more ‘non-users’ to try the new

facility and understand that the centre is open to all, whatever their language.

Whilst the fact that the sample is small needs to be taken into account, the evidence collected

suggests that the redevelopment of Capel Y Tabernacl has generated a range of positive outcomes

especially in terms of local people’s participation in the local community. The evidence also suggests

that the project had contributed to delivering on both of the key outcomes of the People and Places

programme which it was designed to achieve.



4.2. War Memorial Park: Children’s Play Area Project


Project delivered by Corwen War Memorial Park

Start and end date August 2008 to August 2009


grant

£81,057



• Key outcome 2: Improved community relations

• Key outcome 3: Enhanced local environment, community

services and buildings


outcomes

• The project will enable children to play and interact together

reducing social isolation

• The project will improve the play area and provide a pleasant

and safe area for children and families

• Through playing together, children will develop teamwork and

play skills and improve in confidence

This project was to improve the play park at Corwen

(population approximately two thousand, five

hundred) for the benefit of children and young people,

as much of the old equipment had been removed as it

was unsafe. The project was mainly targeted at the

under 12s, however, some of the equipment is suitable

for use by older children as well. The park is based at

the Corwen Memorial Park that comprises of a

community venue as well as space for sports activity

(football, cricket, tennis etc). In addition to providing

various play equipment (including disabled friendly

equipment), the project also provides a picnic area.

There are essentially two parks, separated by coloured

railings, one part for toddlers and the other part for

junior children. The grant, over one year, was to pay

for the supply and installation of play and picnic area

equipment and fencing.


The research team visited the Corwen Memorial Play

Park on the 1st

June 2011. On the day of the visit the

weather was overcast and quite windy; however, there

were still fifteen adults and thirty four children playing

in the park over duration of the three hours which the research team spent there. The research

team undertook interviews with parents and children at the park and also interviewed members of

staff, parents and users of the park at the crèche nearby. Questionnaires were also left at the crèche

for self completion by staff and parents who were not in attendance on the day of the visit. Whilst at

the park we met and interviewed the project manager and also two individuals who were involved in

the management of the project.

The facilities at the War Memorial Play Park,

Corwen (photo provided by BIG)





develop your ability to do the following? (Options provided as part of the question) Proxy and non-

proxy interviews undertaken


Figure 7 shows the number of respondents who said yes when asked whether the project had

helped to develop any of a range of different ‘life skills’. All respondents identified a positive impact

in terms of an improvement in their own or their children’s ability to mix with other people; the

majority identifying the impact as being significant. The perceived benefit is also very high in terms

of an improvement to their or their children’s ability to mix with different people and also to

adopting healthy behaviours. The low perceived benefit in terms of ability to ‘live independently’

and ‘training and employment opportunities’ is an indication of the type of project; it is unlikely to

generate those outcomes.

13

18

4

3

5

2

1

7

3

15

4

5

16

1

Live independently?

Adopt healthy behaviours?






Improve your training and employment opportunities?





explain how the project helped them to develop those abilities identified:

Adopt healthy

behaviours

• “My three children and I use the park every day, we walk there and they play

there for hours instead of them being cooped up in the house playing on

computer games.”

• “My daughter gets loads of exercise while she is here, she is constantly

running around.”

• “They get exercise playing in the park”

• “The children from the nursery and my own children are able to play outside

and get more exercise safely.”

Mix with other

people /

different people

/ communicate

with other

people

• “There is always someone here for me to talk to or my kids to play with.”

• “These benches are ideal; mums can sit and chat while the kids are playing.”

• “The park is used by holiday makers and people who come here from

neighbouring villages.”

• “Because it is such a good park people come from all over the place to use

it.”

• “The children are sharing, playing together and working as teams, team

building.”

• “Because we live in a rural area and contact with other people is good for

them”

• “I met some German children here; they were staying in a caravan park in

Llangollen and they came to the park and we played together. I have never

met anyone German before.” Child

Participate in

community life

• “It is like a meeting place now, having the picnic tables and benches there is

brilliant as we can sit, catch up and watch the children playing safely.”

• “The park is a focal point for the community”

• “The children in the nursery are able to play there with other children from

the local community and my children are able to meet and play with their

friends there.”

Develop thinking

and learning

skills

• “The children we take there from nursery and my own children are learning

to play independently as it is so safe there and in groups as there is always

other kids there.”

• “With the local children being involved in the design, working out suitable

equipment and budgets they have learnt a lot from it. The younger children

playing there are gaining a sense of independence and building confidence as

their parents are sitting on the benches watching them they think they are

playing 'alone' as it is such a safe environment.”

• “Play does develop thinking and learning”

• “The children are developing their skills; social skills, independence and

confidence whilst playing.”

As mentioned above, three of the twenty one people interviewed were involved in the management

of the project as volunteers. None of them had been involved with project management previously;

however, one has now gone on to help manage other community projects in the area;

• “There are local housing estates nearby - seven of them - and they want to use the blue print of

this park to develop smaller ones on their estates. I am helping these sub-groups to organise

smaller satellite parks on their local housing estate.”



4.2.4. Well-being

Ninety five percent (20/21) of the respondents interviewed believed that the project had improved

their own or their children’s physical well-being. The following are an example of comments made:

• “I use the park everyday with my children, we walk there and back”

• “My daughter is constantly on the go when she is here. She is playing outside and is able to use

all of the equipment”

• “Quite often we come down on our bikes in the evening for an hour before the kids go to bed”

• “We come here most days, it is better for the kids being outside and off their computer games”

• “Absolutely, by having the opportunity to use interesting and different equipment, having the

opportunity to push them a little bit more with climbing etc., in a safe environment as the mats

there are so good. It improves the children's concentration spans and pushes their confidence a

bit more”

• “Children are burning off energy when they exercise in the park”

• “It is getting the kids out so they are not sat in front of the television. Mums picking kids up from

school go there before going home and my kids are always asking to go to the park”

One of the children we spoke to at the park said:

• “If the park was not here I would be playing at home, watching TV or something”

Impact was also apparent in terms of improvements to participant’s mental well-being; again with

twenty of the twenty one respondents interviewed perceived that the project had improved how

satisfied they or their children felt with life, six identifying the improvement as being significant.

• “Definitely, it is good for the kids, it is safer as it is enclosed and it is cleaner” X 2

• “Definitely, it is safer as it is enclosed, it is cleaner and it is so much better for the kids to be

playing outside”

• “It means my own children and the children I work with can go and enjoy it and play safely,

learning essential life skills while playing”

• “The children from all different localities can play together”

• “Having somewhere to go where the kids can get fresh air and meet new people and for me to

meet with parents - it is really good”

A group of respondents also felt that the project had a positive impact on their own or their

children’s ‘personal feelings’:

• Thirteen said that it had helped them feel better about themselves;

• Eight said that it had helped them think more clearly

• Six said that it had helped them deal with problems better; and

• Six of the twenty one said that it had helped them feel more optimistic about the future.



4.2.5. Relationships between groups and participation within the community

Nineteen respondents believed that their participation in the project had improved how satisfied

they or their children felt with their neighbourhood as a place to live, fourteen identifying the

change as being significant.

• “We have now got a decent, safe park that is well used by a lot of people.”

• “The facilities have increased; there is now more stuff for the children. The park is being used as

it should be.”

• “Definitely, I feel there is somewhere to go now that is local on a weekend when my husband is

working. It breaks my day up and I can meet friends there.”

• “Definitely, it is now a safer place to come to, the kids are safer now in an enclosed space.”

• “It just brings people together.”

• “It is now a safer place to come to, you can relax knowing they are safe playing and they are

happy.”

• “There is now more stuff for the kids to play on so they are happier here.”

• “When friends visit with small children I can show off our new park and local children now have

a great park with really good equipment in it.”

• “It is somewhere to go with the children”

• “We live two and a half miles away and this is somewhere really good to go. In the holidays my

kids are really happy to come here and we all feel like we have had a day out and are able to

meet up with friends”

• “Having somewhere to take the children where I can also relax and enjoy.”

• “Knowing the kids are safe, now in an enclosed space makes me relax more.”

• “It is a nice park and it makes you want to go there now because it is so good.”

Figure 8 illustrates interviewees’ responses when asked to agree or disagree with a series of

statements with regards to their, or their children’s, relationships and participation in the local

community.



Figure 8: The project has helped me… (Options provided within the question) Proxy and non-proxy

interviews undertaken


The response is positive in each instance but most positive in terms of respondents feeling that the

park had given them or their children the opportunity to make friends in the local area and also

helped them to feel like they belong to something they would call a community.


All twenty one respondents said that the project had both improved the range of services available

as well as improved the quality of those services. The following are examples of the comments

made:

• “The park is brilliant and well used by the local community and others”

• “We now have a well equipped, safe park that people come to from all over the place”

• “There is also a picnic area for parents to meet and sit together”

4.2.7. The quality of the local physical and natural environment & individual’s

pro-environmental behaviour

Eighteen of the twenty one respondents identified positive improvements to the local area’s physical

environment as a result of the project, 16 identifying the improvement as being significant. When

asked how that improvement had taken place, the most common response was that it was a nice

and well designed park (thirteen). Six respondents also emphasised the fact that it provided a ‘safe’

park for the village.

Respondents were then asked a number of questions to explore whether the improvement to the

local environment had changed their personal attitude and behaviour relating to the local

environment. However, once again, none of the respondents were able to identify any kind of

impact in that respect.

21 1

4

9

19

1617

15

Become more active

within the local

community

Make new friends in

the local area

Make friends with

people I never

thought I would be

friends with

Make better friends

in the local area

Feel like I belong to

something I would

call a community

Strongly agree Agree




This is another example of a People and Places grant being used to revamp a park and replace ageing

and unsafe equipment and, as such, ‘the project’ is now completed. However, as in other examples

discussed in this report, in many respects, the project will continue to generate benefits and

outcomes as the park continues to be utilised.

The project manager believes that the project has been a catalyst for people in Corwen to be more

active:

• “We have more kids taking up sport now in Corwen, the local school keeps me informed and we

have started a girls (under 12's) football team and an after school fun football for under 6's.” -

Project Manager

The project manager, at the time of writing this report, was also interested in contacting Big Lottery

Fund for further financial support in order to provide more activities for teenagers in Corwen, a

skate park or a Multi Use Games Area (MUGA). This idea would be supported by the local authority

representative that we spoke to in order to gain an external perspective of the project, who said:

• “Corwen is looking to find its purpose and regenerate and it needs to expand its market wider

than the local market. It needs visitor economy to expand to try and encourage tourism. Corwen

is set in a very picturesque setting and has huge visitor economy potential and we HAVE to make

sure that the community comes along with it. The last thing we want to do is invest and have the

next generation feeling disengaged etc. It is vital that young people are engaged with on the

whole regeneration programme.”

It is further supported by eight of the twenty one respondents interviewed who, when asked if they

had any further comments to make, said;

• “We now need something for the older children”

In terms of ongoing maintenance and upkeep, Denbighshire County Council and the Community

Council have committed to providing a small annual grant; however, as the equipment is still

relatively new this upkeep is minimal. There are also three volunteers that visit the park every

Sunday to litter pick etc.



4.2.9. Conclusion

Whilst the fact that the sample is small needs to be taken into account, the evidence collected

suggests that the installation of the park has generated a range of positive outcomes especially in

terms of improving peoples physical and mental health and also by providing a place where people

can meet and socialise. The park has given children, parents and holidaymakers a place to meet and

play in a safe environment

The evidence also suggests that the project had contributed to delivering both of the key outcomes

of the People and Places programme stated in the application form.

1The facilities at the playing fields in Corwen (photographs provided by BIG)



4.3. For a Better Community


Project delivered by Newport Chinese Community Centre

Start and end date June 2007 to June 2010


grant

£ 159,914



• Key outcome 2: Improved community relations


outcomes

• By improving literacy levels the project will reduce dependence

and stress levels for Chinese people, thus leading to a better

family and community relationship

• Chinese people have more access to advice and advocacy

services

• More awareness of the Chinese culture, its preservation and

promotion

• More cooperation between different sections of the

community

• People feel safer and less isolated

• People from different age groups, genders, mother tongues

and cultural backgrounds have better communication,

improved mutual respect and interdependence.

The project funded the provision of a drop-in facility to

enable the Chinese community in the local area to access

help, advice, and support as well as to signpost them to

appropriate services. It benefits people of all ages from

the Chinese community in Newport and surrounding

areas; including Torfaen, Monmouthshire, Blaenau

Gwent and Merthyr Tydfil. The Newport Chinese

Community Centre is the only one of its kind in South

East Wales. Services and activities at the centre include a

‘drop-in’ where people can bring their bills, letters and so

on for translation, an outreach home-visiting service;

accompanying people who do not speak English on visits

to GPs, schools, police, jobcentres etc as well as offering

courses, workshops and social/community events. The

three year grant was to pay for one full time salary, recruitment costs, expenses, building

maintenance and insurance, training, monitoring and evaluation, running costs, marketing and

publicity, professional and legal fees, mobile phone and cleaning costs.

Participants in the project being interviewed

by a Wavehill researcher




The research team visited the Chinese Community Centre on the 7th

June 2011. On the day of the

visit they were holding a ‘Dragon Festival’ which involved celebrating Chinese cultures. The research

team undertook interviews with twenty five beneficiaries, all regular users of the centre. Some of

the people we interviewed were also involved in the management of the project as volunteers. The

research team was accompanied by 2 interpreters, organised through the Centre, to assist with the

interviews. Questionnaires were also left (translated into Chinese) at the centre for self-completion.

Eight questionnaires were returned giving us thirty three respondents in total.



develop your ability to do the following? (options provided as part of the question)

Total number of respondents = 33

All respondents identified a positive impact in terms of an improvement in their ability to mix with

different people, the majority identifying this impact as significant (Figure 9). There was also a

perceived, positive benefit from respondents in terms of their ability to fully participate in

community life, develop thinking and learning skills, communicate with other people and adopt

healthy behaviours.

The perceived benefit is less significant in terms of improving training and employment

opportunities and to develop thinking and learning skills, although seventeen out of the thirty three

people still identified this as a positive outcome generated via the training opportunities provided at

the Centre. Other respondents were however already in employment.

17

17

28

22

17

15

16

14

8

14

4

11

14

15

16

3

Live independently

Adopt healthy behaviours






Improve your training and employment

opportunities?





explain how the project helped them to develop those abilities identified:

Participate in community

life

• “It has made it easier to integrate.”

• “I feel part of the community coming here.”

• “It gets me out, gives me somewhere to go.”

• “I am out meeting people instead of being stuck at home.”

Improve training and

employment

opportunities

• “I have done two IT courses.”

• “The classes and training provided by the project improve my skill

and employable ability, this gives me better opportunities”

• “Teaching skills”

• “Got a job in local health club”

• “With the food hygiene certificate”

Develop Thinking and

learning skills

• “I am doing the English classes here and can use the computers.”

• “Learning the computer here has helped me with my business.”

• “I have learned about email and the internet, I now know how to

shop on-line and support my kids on-line.”

• “Volunteering helps develop various skills, including thinking and

learning”

Mix with other people /

different people /

communicate with other

people

• “Coming here gives me the chance to see other people.”

• “I have made new friends.”

• “We go on trips to different places and meet different people and

people come here to do talks.”

• “Myself, my sister and neighbour are members as well as a Welsh

couple we know who have adopted a little Chinese girl. On the bus

to the centre we are meeting other people, through the talks,

festivals and celebrations we hold and through the trips we go on.”

• “My English is improved thanks to the classes.”

• “The English classes and I have learnt how to use email.”

• “Got to know a lot of people from different age groups and cultural

backgrounds”

Adopt healthy

behaviours

• “There is a fitness class and walking club.”

• “Exercise classes and walking club.”

• “They come to the doctors or other health appointments with us

and do health talks in the centre.”

• “Health care talks, learnt to dance and I now go to a gym which

was accessed through the centre.”

• “Learnt Tai Chi, ball room dancing and play badminton”

Live independently • “I bring my post from home in to be translated and attend the

English classes.”

• “Someone will go to appointments with me and help me

understand letters etc.”

• “Help with communicating with doctors and specialists.”

• “I have more confidence now as I know more English.”

• “Through learning English in the NCCC I am able to understand

basic English and am able to read and understand some school

letters for my children”

• “I have just got a job in a local health club”



Figure 10: Response to the question – Have the new skills that you have developed helped you to do

any of the following? (Options provided as part of the question)

Total number of respondents = 33

As illustrated in figure 10, being involved in projects such as For a Better Community can have many

positive impacts on individuals, most notably three believing the project has helped them to get a

job, eight doing more volunteering and eleven becoming a volunteer.

4.3.4. Well-being

Twenty nine of the thirty three respondents interviewed believed that the project had improved

their physical well-being. The following comments are examples of those comments made by those

who identified a positive impact:

• “Very much, they go to the doctors with me and provide extended exercise classes.”

• “We have been attending health clubs and health fairs, gaining more knowledge of health care

and how to look after ourselves and I attend the extended exercise classes.”

• “I have learnt to dance and now go to the gym so I am fitter now than I was.”

• “I play badminton now and do Kung Fu.”

• “Having the health talks from doctors, nurses and advice on healthy living. It is easy to get

depressed if you are sitting in the house every day so coming here prevents that. We do exercise

classes, Tai Chi, Kung Fu, dancing and walking.”

• “I've improved my diet, exercise levels and health knowledge”

Respondents also felt that the project had a positive impact on their ‘personal feelings’:

• twenty eight said that it had helped them feel better about themselves;

• twenty eight said that it had helped them deal with problems better; and

• twenty six said that had helped them think more clearly;

• twenty six said it made them feel more optimistic about the future.

3

3

2

1

11

8

8

5

3

Get a job

Get a better job



Become a volunteer



Become involved in other community projects, if yes

what is the role in those projects?

Anything else



Mental well-being is a key outcome of this project. Many of the respondents said that they had

suffered isolation, lack of independence and lack of social activities since moving to Wales. Two

respondents told our researcher:

• “I feel less isolated now. I moved here twenty two years ago and every day I wanted to go

back to China, there was nothing in Wales, nothing in Cardiff or Swansea so I moved to

Newport because I knew I could have a life and a future here because of the centre.”

• “I feel more confident in front of people; I was very shy even within the Chinese Community

in the past. I will go out to different places with my wife with more confidence - cities in the

UK - and I will buy tickets.”

The project is extremely important to these people as otherwise they are living in isolation. It gives

them a place where they are able to socialise and confidence for them to integrate into society

more. Another example of an improved well-being outcome was provided by the project manager

who said:

• “We helped an elderly woman who lived alone, she was ninety six years old and had lived in

England since 1977 but she did not speak any English and was very isolated. We visited her every

night to help her with her medication but the fire engine and paramedics were constantly being

called to her home. Living alone was too much for her so we helped to move her to a Chinese

Residential home in Birmingham. She is very happy there and we visit and phone her often.”

4.3.5. Relationships between groups and participation within the community

Unsurprisingly given the outcomes discussed above, thirty one of the thirty three respondents

believed that their participation in the project had improved how satisfied they felt with their

neighbourhood as a place to live, twenty two identifying the change as being significant.

• “Otherwise I would not know anything about the local area and other people. I am learning

English so that I can actually go out by myself.”

• “I do not want to move anymore now. I have got two sons, one in Hong Kong, the other in

Malaysia they always invite us to come over but we want to stay here. Previously I did not like

living here as it was very boring and I had no friends, now I love it. Life is more fun in the UK now

because of the centre, we go hiking and on day trips.”

• “I feel more settled here now I have more friends.”

• “I feel less isolated now, I cannot speak English, cannot drive, cannot do anything, it is scary. This

place gives you confidence.”

• “I know how to deal with problems when they occur and the Better Community project can sign

post me to get help if necessary.”

• “Know more local people than before”



Figure 11 illustrates respondents’ responses when asked to agree or disagree with a series of

statements with regards to their relationships and participation in the local community. The

response is positive in all instances but most positive in terms of respondents feeling that the project

enables them to make friends in the local area and also making friends with people they never

thought they would.

Figure 11: The project has helped me… (Options provided within the question)



Thirty two of the thirty three respondents said that the project had improved the range of services

available in the local community, nineteen of which said it was a significant improvement. The same

thirty two were then asked if it had improved the quality of services and all thirty two respondents

said it had, twenty one of which said significantly.

When asked if the project had improved services in any other way, eleven of the thirty three said yes

it had; below are typical examples of the comments made to illustrate their response:

• “Sometimes people / organisations will ring us and say that they have Chinese people there and

they need a translator and the Police have needed advice sometimes.”

• “The centre is bringing people together to celebrate Chinese New Year, Christmas parties etc.”

• “The centre is a vital part of the community.”

• “Interpretation provided during the medical appointment”

18

27

1921 20

11

6

13

10 11

Become more

active within the

local community

Make new friends

in the local area

Make friends with

people I never

thought I would be

friends with

Make better friends

in the local area

Feel like I belong to

something I would

call a community

Strongly agree Agree



4.3.7. The quality of the local physical and natural environment & individual’s

pro-environmental behaviour

Whilst all thirty three respondents answered the questions about the environmental impact of the

project, only one was able to identify improvements to the local area’s physical improvement as a

result of the project making the following comment:

• “People are more aware of the importance of recycling.”

It is however important to stress that this project was not designed to achieve key outcome three of

the programme (enhanced local environment, community services and buildings)and, as such, such a

low perception of this type of outcome is not of concern. It is perhaps therefore unsurprising that

none of the respondents were able to identify any benefits to the local natural environment or

changes in their own attitude / behaviour to the environment.


Although the People and Places funding has come to an end the project manager confirmed that

they had secured further Big Lottery funding to ensure the continuation of the project, she said:

• “The centre will continue to offer IT classes, English lessons, health talks, and festivals - most of

what we were delivering before. This is being funded through BIG and some other sources and

some self funding. Also, the landlord is very good here and lets us use the hall for celebrations for

free.”

It is suggested by the project manager that the closure of the project would have a very detrimental

impact on its users:

• “If the centre was too close then there would be no structure or network for the Chinese

community - there is nothing else for them in the area. The impact would be life changing - we

work as a family and the elderly members of the community would struggle very much. Some

families are quite dependant on the centre, they have autistic children and the volunteers are

virtually their guardians as we take them to school and to appointments etc. Also the police

would miss us! Sometimes they ring and say they have arrested a Chinese person and need a

translator or sometimes just for advice on how to communicate with Chinese people.”

The following comments made by respondents would concur with this opinion;

• “The centre is important to us as there is no other support available to the Chinese community.”

• “This centre is important to the community as some do not speak English and if funding were

stopped it would be awful.”

• “I love the centre, the staff are very helpful. If funding ended I would feel very sad as the

networking would be gone, there would be no translation or support etc.”

• “I want the centre to continue being supported. If the centre were not here, there would be no

place to get together, no trips with other people and nowhere else to get help.”



The project enables people to gain access to the support that they require on a regular basis. Also, a

lot of the people we interviewed were extremely isolated in terms of their inability to speak English

making the opportunity to learn the English language, socialise and integrate in the centre

invaluable.

4.3.9. Conclusion

The For a Better Community Project has clearly had a positive impact on the sample of beneficiaries

and volunteers interviewed, particularly in terms of social interaction. If we assume that all

beneficiaries benefitted in the same way, it suggests that the impact on the local community has

been significant.

Whilst the fact that the sample is relatively small needs to be taken into account, it is also clear that

the project will have achieved key outcome two of the People and Places programme; improved

community relations.

A Wavehill researcher participating in activities at the project.



5. Conclusion

It is important to take into account the fact that the work of the evaluation is ongoing and that

further projects will participate in the fieldwork in 2012. However, the evidence gathered to date

suggests that the People and Places projects will (as a group) achieve positive outcomes against each

of the indicators that have been developed and, hence, the three key programme outcomes. Most

obviously, People and Places projects develop and create social networks. They build social capital

and in particular they help transform weak social capital into strong social capital which improves

the longer term prospects of people and communities.

People and Places projects are however achieving the same outcomes in different ways depending

on where and who they are working with. This is the crux of the demand led ethos of the

programme; applicants are given the opportunity to address key issues in their community in the

way that they deem is most appropriate. The findings of the evaluation to date suggest that the

approach is effective and that it is possible to achieve the same outcomes in a range of different

ways.

However, although the matter is not discussed in this report as not to repeat the discussion on the

2010 Annual Report20

, one of the consequence of a demand led approach is that ensuring that

projects ‘fit’ with other ongoing activities in an area can be challenging. And, the ‘external’

stakeholders that we discussed People and Places projects with continue to express concern on this

matter. In particular, concerns continue to be expressed about how BIG take into account the

complementarily of the projects funded by People and Places with other projects in the area. This is

something that BIG needs to address to ensure that the resources that are available via People and

Places are being utilised as effectively as possible.

20

The 2010 Annual Report is published online:

http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/er_people_places_annual_report_2010.pdf



Appendix 1: Sample demographic data

Gender

Frequency %

Female 129 72.5

Male 49 27.5

178 100.0

Item non response 7

185

Age

Frequency %

Under 18 17 9.9

19-25 9 5.2

26-35 18 10.5

36-50 49 28.5

51-65 51 29.7

Over 65 28 16.3

Total 172 100.0

Refused 13

Overall

total 185

Ethnicity

Frequency %

Welsh 113 61.1

Chinese 32 17.3

English 29 15.7

Did not get asked the question 7 3.8

British 2 1.1

Nepalese 1 0.5

Scottish 1 0.5

185 100



Employment

Frequency %

Full time employment 29 16.4

Full time education 23 13.0

Part time employment 37 20.9

Retired 43 24.3

Government supported employment training course 2 1.1

Self Employed 17 9.6

Unable to work due to a long term illness or disability 6 3.4

Maternity leave 1 0.6

Unemployed 4 2.3

Unpaid family worker 15 8.5

Total 177 100.0

Refused 1

Did not get asked the question 6

Overall total 184

Long term illness

Frequency %

Yes 27 15.4

No 148 84.6

175 100.0

Refused 8

Did not get asked the question 1

184



Appendix 2: Bibliography

Burningham, K. and Thrush, D. (2001) “Rainforests are a long way from here”: The environmental

concerns of disadvantaged groups, JRF.

Burrows, R. and Rhodes, D. (1998) Unpopular Places? Area disadvantage and the geography of

misery in England, JRF.

Coleman, J and Hoffer, T. (1987) Public and Private High Schools: The Impact of Communities

Gidwani, V. (2010) Social Capital in Gregory et al. (2010) Dictionary of Human Geography

Heffron, John M. 2000. 'Beyond community and society: The externalities of social capital building.'

Policy Sciences 33: 477-494.

Kosek, J. “Environmental Justice” in Gregory et al. (2010) Dictionary of Human Geography

Putman, R. (2000) Bowling Alone

Worpole, K. (2000) In our backyard: the social promise of environmentalism

wavehill ymchwil gwerthuso arolygon

research evaluation surveys

t: 01545 571 711

e: [email protected]

w: www.wavehill.com

Wavehill Ltd, 8 Water Street | 8 Heol y Dŵr, Aberaeron, Ceredigion, SA46 0DG

evaluation of the people & places programme

Documents

report version

report acknowledgements

annual report year

places programme year

annual reports year

big lottery funds people

big lottery fund wales

programme level analysis