manchester beacon interim review - august 2010

8/8/2019 Manchester Beacon Interim Review - August 2010

1/83

ReportTitle

FinalReportforSteeringBoard

August2010

RegisteredName:EKOSLtd

RegisteredOffice:St.GeorgesStudios,93-97St.GeorgesRoad,Glasgow,G36JA

Telephone:01413531994

Web:www.ekos-consultants.co.uk

ManchesterBeaconforPublic

EngagementInterimEvaluation


2/83

EKOSQualityAssuranceRecord

Nameandemail DatePreparedby: MadelineSmith

NicolaGraham

ReginaTrenkler-Fraser

SuzanneMunro

16August2010

Proofedby: LornaBryson

16August2010

QualityControlledby: MadelineSmith

16August2010

Ifrequired,copiesofthisdocumentareavailableinlargeprintbycontacting

theauthordirect.

AspartofourgreenofficepolicyallEKOSreportsareprinteddoublesided.


3/83

Contents

ExecutiveSummary 1

1. Introduction 9

1.1 Background 9

1.2 EvaluationAimsandObjectives 9

1.3 ApproachandMethod 10

1.4 StructureoftheReport 11

2. TheManchesterBeacon 12

2.1 GovernanceandManagementArrangements 12

2.2 NWDABeaconObjectives 14

2.3 ManchesterBeaconObjectives 15

2.4 AlignmentofObjectives 16

3. SupportedActivity 19

3.1 Funding 19

3.2 TheProjects 20

4. FeedbackfromStakeholders 24

4.1 Role 24

4.2 Rationale 24

4.3 PerformanceagainstExpectations 24

4.4 Objective1PEisEncouragedandSupported 26

4.5 Objective5:DeeperPartnershipWorking 27


4/83

4.6 OtherManchesterBeaconObjectives 30

4.7 Additionality 31

4.8 ValueforMoney 32

4.9 FutureDevelopmentIssuesandOpportunities 33

5. FeedbackfromParticipants 35

5.1 Background 35

5.2 FeedbackfromUniversityStaff 36

5.3 FeedbackfromNon-UniversityStaff 43

5.4 Importantvaluesinpublicengagement 49

5.5 NationalSurveyResponses 50

6. PerformanceAgainstObjectives 57

6.1 NWDAObjectives 57

6.2 ManchesterBeaconObjectives 60

6.3 StrategicAddedValue 62

7. LearningPointsandRecommendations 66

7.1 Conclusions 66

7.2 IssuesandLearningpoints 67

7.3 LearningforNWDA 71

7.4 LearningforBeaconandOtherFunders 72

7.5 Recommendations 74

Appendices 78


5/83

NWDA:EvaluationofManchesterBeacon

1

ExecutiveSummary

Introduction

ThisreportsetsoutthefindingsoftheevaluationoftheManchesterBeacon

forPublicEngagement,focusingontheNorthWestDevelopmentAgencys

(NWDA)fundingcontribution.

TheManchesterBeaconisoneofsixcentresinvolvedinaUK-wideinitiative,

fundedbytheHigherEducationFundingCouncilforEngland(HEFCE),

ResearchCouncilsUK(RCUK),andtheWellcomeTrust.ThefouryearUK-wideBeaconsforPublicEngagementinitiative(2008/12)seekstobring

aboutculturechangeinthewayHEIs,theirstaff,andtheirstudentsreach

out,listen,andengagewiththepublic.

ManchesterBeaconisapartnershipbetweenUniversityofManchester

(UoM),ManchesterMetropolitanUniversity(MMU),UniversityofSalford

(UoS),MuseumofScienceandIndustry(MOSI),andManchester:Knowledge

Capital(M:KC).

TheManchesterBeaconsecuredadditionalfundingfromApril2008to

March2010fromtheNWDA.Althoughthefocusofthisevaluationisthe

NWDAfundingwhichconcludedinMarch2010,itisineffectaninterim

evaluationofthewholeprogramme,whichshouldinformtheremaining

deliverytime(toDecember2011)andinputtodiscussionofthefuture

directionofsuchinitiatives.

NWDABeaconObjectives

InApril2008NWDAallocated240,000forBeaconrelatedactivity.The

specificobjectivesfortheManchesterBeaconfortheNWDAfundingwere:

toachievesignificantlyimprovedunderstandingandappreciationof

theuniversitiesandinstitutionsinthelocalareabyresidentsofthe

localcommunitiesbyMarch2010;

toachievemuchimprovedunderstandingandappreciationof

neighbouringcommunitiesbytheuniversitiesandinstitutions;

toputinplaceanumberof(intheregionoffive)sustainable

engagements/projectsthatinvolveacademicsworkingwithlocal

communities;

todevelopacadreofupto40academicswithanenthusiasmfor,and

experienceof,workingwithdeprivedcommunities;and


6/83


2

tohelpcatalyseanupliftinthenumberoflocalresidents(in

particularthosefromdeprivedcommunitieswithnopriorcontact

withtheHigherEducationInstitutions)withapositiveattitudetowardsworkingintheuniversitiesandothermajoremployers,or

studyingat(orwithhelpfrom)thoseHEIs.

ManchesterBeaconObjectives

Fivethemesandobjectiveswerearticulatedandadoptedbystakeholdersin

theManchesterBeacon.Thesearedescribedinmoredetailbelow:

Priority:Behaviourchange

Objective1:Publicengagementisencouraged,valuedandsupported

Objective2:ChangeperceptionsandimproveaccessibilityPriority:IncreasingEngagementlevel

Objective3:Increasingtherelevanceofinstitutionactivityand

connectivitywithcommunities

Objective4:Improvetheopportunitiesforsustainabletwo-way

learning

Priority:Deeperpartnershipworking

Objective5:DevelopdeeperpartnershipworkingacrosstheBeacon

partnersandwiththecommunity

TheoverallobjectivesfortheManchesterBeaconarestronglyalignedwith,

andcontributeto,NWDAsfundingobjectivesfortheManchesterBeacon.

SupportedActivity

Atotalofsevensustainableengagementprojectsweredelivered.The

projectswere:

o ArcSpaceManchester

o UoMDevelopmentAwards

o CommunityLeadershipProgramme

o CulturalAwards

o CommunityScienceAwardso MMUPublicEngagementFellowships(fundingleveredby

MMU)

o NetworkingandEvents(e.g.Comixed,MappingCreativity,

BeaconSummitmatch-fundedbyHEFCE,RCUK,Wellcome

Trustfunding).

Manyoftheseprojectsinvolvedseveralindividualresearchand

collaborationprojects,involvingacademics,culturalorganisationsand

communitypartners.Atotalof29individualcollaborativeprojectshave

beensupported,manymorethanthefivesustainableprojectsoriginally

anticipated.


7/83


3

FeedbackfromStakeholders

Indepthconsultationtookplacewith20differentpartnersand

stakeholders.

ManagementandStructure

Themanagementanddeliveryoftheprogrammeisviewedtobeeffective

andtheprojectisfelttobewellmanaged.Themanagementandgovernance

structures(withthevariouscommitteesandworkinggroups)tookawhileto

beorganised,butarenowviewedtobeworkingwell.

Theteamiscreditedwithdrivingforwardtheprojectsuccessfully.The

approachisviewedtohavebeencreativeandenergetic,ifchallenging.The

supportfromseniorchampionsacrossthepartnersisseenascrucialandhasbeenverystronglyendorsedacrosstheManchesterBeacon.

PEPriorities

TheworkoftheBeaconwasfelttohavestronglyinfluencedthePEpriorities

oftheorganisation,especiallyatastrategiclevel.PEisnowevidentin

strategicdocuments,facultyplans,grantapplications,specificappointments

andisbeingbuiltintopromotionsandperformancecriteria.More

profoundlytheapproachusedbytheBeaconhasbeenadoptedinother

Publicandcommunityengagementendeavours.

PartnershipWorkingandcollaborationAlthoughthereisalonghistoryofpartnershipworkingbetweenthe

partners,newrelationships,andfurthercollaborationswerebuiltbecauseof

theBeacon.Itwashighlightedthateachpartnerbringsdifferentstrengths,

buttheyallhadslightlydifferingagendas(i.e.Researchfocussedor

Communityengagementfocussed),whichcanbeachallenge.MOSIs

inclusionasaculturalpartnerwasviewedtohaveaddedagreatdealtothe

programme,bringinganon-HEIperspective,PEprofessionalismand

expertise.Furthermore,M:KCssupportingrole,civiclinksand

understandingoftheBeaconsinnovativeapproacheshasbeenpivotal.

Itwasfeltthattheapproachtoengagementwiththecommunityhas

changedfromdoingthistopeopletoco-creationandanimprovingsense

oftreatingallasequals.Inadditiontherewasviewedtobeabetter

understandingaboutthediversityandrichnessofthecommunity.

OtherBeaconObjectivesandwiderbenefits

Thevastmajorityofthosewhorespondedfeltthattheimageofthe

organisationshadimprovedwiththecommunity,with93%feelingthatthe

institutionsweremoreimportantandrelevanttothelocalcommunities.

Accesstofacilitieswasseenasamoredifficultissue,althoughimprovement

hadbeenmadeincertainareas.


8/83


4

AlloftherespondentsfeltthatwithouttheBeacon,althoughsomePE

projectswouldstillhavehappened,theywouldhavebeenslower,oflower

quality,andlesserimpact.TheinvestmentintheBeaconwasviewedashavinghadalargeimpact,throughinfluencingandcatalysingfurther

benefits,andreachingahighnumberofpeople.TheBeaconwasalsofeltto

becontributingtowiderbenefits,includingleadinglearning,developing

capabilityandestablishingManchesterasacentreofgoodpractice.

Futurefocus

ThemainfocusfortheBeaconuntiltheendofthecurrentfundingwasfelt

tobetobuildonthegoodwork,toembedthechangeofcultureand

reinforcethebehavioursacrosstheinstitutions,tosustainimpact.

MainstreamingPEandbroadeningengagementbeyondtheinitialenthusiastswasimportant,aswellasexploringmorejointprojects.

Participantbenefits

Atotalof31participantscontributedtotheevaluationthroughindepth

telephoneinterviewandonlinesurveys.BothStaffandCommunitygroup

membersidentifiedpositivelearningandpersonalbenefits

Alargemajorityofcommunitymembersreportedanimprovedrelationship

betweentheuniversityandthelocalcommunityandfelttheuniversitywas

betterconnectedwiththelocalcommunitythanbefore.Foruniversitystaff,92%ofrespondentsfeltthattheuniversityhasabetterunderstandingofthe

localcommunityandwasbetterconnectedasaresultoftheBeaconproject.

Participantsreportedgainingnewskillsandknowledge,increased

confidence,interestinnewideasthroughtheirinvolvementaswellas

enjoyment.Significantly,averyhighproportioneitherhadalreadytaken,or

plannedtotake,furtheractionasaresultoftheirparticipation.

Aparallelanalysiswasundertakenfromawidersurveyofstaffaspartofthe

UK-widestudyoftheBeacons.Whilst70%ofrespondentstothissurvey

reportedthattheyfelttheworkcultureoftheirinstitutionwassupportivetowardsPEactivities,only19%reportedthattheybelievedthatthe

institutionrewardsthosewhotakepartinPEactivities.Ofthosesurveyedin

theManchester,65%agreedthatengagementwithcommunitieshad

increased.

Performanceagainstobjectives

Thisevaluationevidencesthattheprogrammehasdeliveredwellagainstthe

NWDAobjectivessetatthestartofthefunding.Inmanycasesthemore

quantitativeelementshavebeenexceeded,andevidencegatheredshows

improvementsinthemorequalitativeobjectives.


9/83


5

AnassessmenthasalsobeenmadeagainstManchesterBeaconObjectives,

andgoodprogressisevidencedhereaswell.InparticularObjective1(PEis

valuedandrewarded)andObjective5(deeperpartnershipworking),whichinsomewaysaretheunderpinningobjectivesoftheManchesterBeacon,

bothshowedgoodevidenceofimprovement.

IssuesandLearningpoints

Partnership

Thepartnersinvolvedareverydiverse,withdifferentstrengthsanddifferent

expectations.Thisdiversitymeanstheycanlearnfromeachother.The

culturalpartnerofMOSIhasbroughtdifferentstrengthstotheprogramme

andM:KChashelpedbringsupportandanunderstandingofinnovation.

Thereisalonghistoryofpartnershipworkingacrossthepartners.However

theBeaconhasallowednewpartnershipstobebuilt,newrelationshipsto

beformed,andadeepeningoftrust.AkeyfactorfortheManchester

Beaconistherealcommitmentfromthetopacrossallinstitutions.

Approach

TheapproachtakenbytheManchesterBeacon,oflisteninginthefirstyear,

althoughalwayspartoftheoriginalproposalintheBeaconbid,hasbeen

challengingforsome.Howevertheconsensusseemstobethatthishasimprovedthequalityofdelivery,andtheyarenowdoingbetterPEandnot

justmoreofit.

ManchesterBeaconisseenasoneoftheleadingBeaconsUK-wide.The

approachtakenbytheManchesterBeacon,thediversityofthepartnership,

andtheemphasisonlocalcommunitiesandtwo-wayengagementdiffers

fromotherBeacons.Theimportanceofseniorchampions,therelativelywell

resourcedteamandthediversitytheyhavemanagedtoengenderareallkey

elementsinthissuccess.

Structure

Thematrixstructure,wheretheteamispartoftheBeaconbuthostedin

theirhomeinstitution,hasbroughtbothpositivesandnegatives.Whilst

positiveinthat,theteammembersareallembeddedwithintheir

organisation,itischallengingtoeffectivelytrytoaligntwoagendas.

Theworkinggroupsstructureandtheirpurposetooktimetobeestablished,

butarenowmorestructured.Astheprogrammegoesintoitsfinalstages,

theyneedtomakesuretheyputforwardconcreterecommendationstothe

leadershipgroup.


10/83


6

Overcomingbarriers

Languageisidentifiedasabigbarrierininitialstagesofengagement.

Buildingconfidenceandcapacityisastrongenablertowardstwo-way

engagement.ManyoftheprojectsinitiatedbytheBeacontacklethisissue.

Buildingtrustisakeychallenge.Itisbasedonpersonalrelationsandtakes

timetodevelop.TheroleoftheBeaconinusingengagementthrough

networks,eventsandprojectstofacilitate,channelandbuildconnections

hashelpedovercomethis.

Learningfromexperience

Therearegoodexamplesoflearningfromearlierprojectsfeedingintonew

projectdevelopment,showingthevalueofapartnershipprogramme,where

learningcanbeshared.Bothsuccessandfailurecanfeedintothislearning.

Followingsharinganddissemination,itisalsoimportanttoaddresswhatis

goingtohappennextasaresultoftheproject/interventiontoensurethey

arenotjustprojectsinisolationthatthenhavenolongertermimpact.This

isakeyelementinbuildingsustainabilityandlongtermchange.

Broker/Catalystrole

Theimportanceofthebeaconteamasabrokerandchannelforlinkages

shouldnotbeunderestimated.Thisworksbothbetweenthepartnersand

withthecommunity.

Earlyadopters

Asisinevitableinachangemanagementprogramme,thosemostengagedat

theearlystageswillbethosewhowerealreadyenthusiasticandearly

adopters.Thisisalsotrueforcommunityparticipantswherethemost

interestedaretheonesmostlikelytobecomeinvolved.Thisdoesallowa

smallminoritytoaccusetheBeaconofnotgoingfarenoughandplaying

safe.Thereisevidence,however,thatnewpeoplearebecomingengagedas

theprogrammeprogresses.

RaisingExpectations

OneriskintheBeaconapproachisthathavingsuccessfullyraiseddemand

andbuiltcapacitywithinthecommunity,thisraisesexpectations.Ifthisis

notsustainedthismaydisappointthecommunitypartnersandthetrust

reinforcingtheserelationshipswillbedamaged.Thisisakeyissuefor

sustainability.


11/83


7

Embeddinglongtermchange

Atpresentthebeaconteamhavebuiltnetworksandrelationships,butthis

islinkedtotheindividuals,andisstilldisconnectedfromtheinstitution.

Withseniorsupportandonthegroundprojectsthereisatopdownand

bottomupapproach.However,therearestillmanystaffforwhomPEisstill

seenasanoptionalactivity.Recognitionandincentives,andsystemsand

processes,suchasperformanceobjectives,canhelpinthisagendabecome

embedded.

WhereastheimpactoftheManchesterBeacon(especiallygiventhesizeand

scopeoftheproject)shouldnotbeoverstated,itneverthelesshas

influencedandcatalysedawholerangeofchanges,improvementsandconnections,andbuiltamomentumbehinditsactivities.

LearningforNWDA

innovativeapproach-theapproachtakenbytheBeaconis

innovative,involvingengaging,listening,andidentifyingneedsand

mutualbenefits.Thereispotentiallearninghereforotherinitiatives

whereengagingdiversepartnerswithdifferingagendasisatthecore

oftheprogramme;

buildacrossstrengths-aspartoftheBeaconprogrammethe

Universitieshaveworkedcloselyinpartnership,togetherwithMOSI

andM:KC.Thisisacitywideapproach,whichrespondents

consideredtoenhancecivicprideandbuildManchestersreputation

asacentreofgoodpractice;

highStrategicAddedValue-thisprojecthasdeliveredhighSAV

returns.Throughleverage,influenceandparticularlythecatalytic

roleoftheManchesterBeacon,thishasbeenevidencedthroughthe

evaluation;and

maximisingassets -forNWDAakeypurposeofinvestmentwas

maximisingtheassetsoftheManchestercorridorandbuildingcoherentandattractiveplace.Bypromotingandadoptinggenuine

two-wayengagementpracticesandbuildingcapacityand

connectivitywiththelocalcommunitytheBeaconhashelped

engenderamoreconnectedenvironment.

LearningforBeaconandOtherFunders

partnership-amajorstrengthoftheManchesterBeaconhasbeen

thepartnership.Thisdeeperlevelofpartnershipshouldcontinueto

bebuiltuponandotheropportunitiesexplored,includingthefuture


12/83


8

plansforpublicandcommunityengagementandknowledge

exchangeactivity;

roleofbroker-theBeaconteamhasestablisheditselfasan

importantbrokerinmakingconnectionsandhelpingdevelop

linkages.Thenextstepistowidenthiselementofconnectivity.

commitmentfromthetop-oneofthesuccessesoftheManchester

Beaconisthelevelofseniorcommitment,withstrongchampions

acrossallpartners.Thisneedstobereinforcedandembeddedwithin

systemsandprocessesthatdemonstratethevalue,incentiviseand

recognisePE;

continuallearning-thelearningfrompilotsandpracticetested

throughtheBeaconneedstobecontinuallyreviewedandabsorbedintonewapproaches.Understandingofbarriersandhowto

overcomethemhashelpedinformnewactivity.Ensuringthis

environmentforlearningisnotlostoncethecurrentBeaconfunding

hasconcludedisanissuetobeconsideredforthefuture;

capturingimpactandbenefit-thelearningfromthisevaluation

processwillbeembeddedintointernalevaluationprocesses,

includingareviewoftheMonitoringandEvaluationFramework

(M&EF),languageandprocessesusedandforthefinalevaluationto

maximisecapturingofimpact.Inparticularcapturingthebenefits

andimpactsofinterventionsshouldbeahighpriority.Inaddition

considerationofhowtocoherentlygathercommunityperceptionof

improvedimageandrelevanceshouldbeexplored.Itisalso

importantaspartoftheculturechangetocapturethechangein

behaviours;

Sustainability-ambitionsforthefuturemustincludehowtokeep

peopledrivingatthesamepacesoasnottolosemomentumonce

theinitialfundingfinishes.Inadditionhavingbuiltexpectationsand

demandwithincommunitypartners,thoughtmustbegivenasto

howtocontinuetonurturethoserelationships,andensurethatinteractionisacontinualprocess;and

embeddinggoodpractice-amajorfocusfortheremainderofthe

Beaconfundingistoembedgoodpracticeintotheinstitutions.This

couldalsobepowerfullyreinforcediftheotherfundersofthis

programme(HEFCE,RCUK,WellcomeTrust)ensuredthatrecognition

ofPEisbuiltintotheirfundingcriteriaratherthanbeingseenas

separate.Thiscouldbeapowerfulincentiveifreinforcedfromthose

fundingHEIs.


13/83


9

1. IntroductionThisreportsetsoutthefindingsoftheevaluationoftheManchesterBeacon

forPublicEngagementundertakenbetweenAprilandJuly2010.Thefocusof

theevaluationisontheNorthWestDevelopmentAgencys(NWDA)funding

contribution.

ThisSectionsetsoutthebackgroundtothisevaluation,itsobjectives,and

theworkcarriedout.

1.1 Background

TheManchesterBeaconisoneofsixcollaborativecentresinvolvedinaUK-

wideinitiativetosupportpublicengagementbetweenHEIsandthegeneral

public.ThenationalBeaconinitiativeisfundedbytheHigherEducation

FundingCouncilforEngland(HEFCE),ResearchCouncilsUK(RCUK),andthe

WellcomeTrust.

ThefouryearnationalBeaconsforPublicEngagementinitiative(2008/12)

seekstobringaboutculturechangeinthewayHEIs,theirstaff,andtheir

studentsreachout,listen,andengagewiththepublic.

InManchester,theinitiativeisapartnershipbetweentheUniversityof

Manchester(UoM),ManchesterMetropolitanUniversity(MMU),the

UniversityofSalford(UoS),theMuseumofScienceandIndustry(MOSI),and

Manchester:KnowledgeCapital(M:KC).

TheManchesterBeaconsecuredadditionalfundingfromApril2008to

March2010fromtheNWDA.Althoughthefocusofthisevaluationisthe

NWDAfundingwhichconcludedinMarch2010,itisineffectaninterim

evaluationofthewholeprogramme,whichshouldinformtheremaining

deliverytime(toDecember2011)andinputtodiscussionofthefuture

directionofsuchinitiatives.

1.2 EvaluationAimsandObjectives

TheNWDAMonitoringandEvaluationPlanspecifiedthedetailedevaluation

objectivesfortheManchesterBeaconfunding.

Theobjectiveswereto:

establishtheimpactoftheprojectagainstitsoriginalobjectives;


14/83


10

assessprogressandachievements,includinganydifferencesfrom

thoseforeseenattheoutset;

assesshoweffectivetheprojecthasbeenindeliveringagainstits

objectivesandtargets;

examinecosteffectiveness,includingconsiderationofqualitative

issues;

commentonthesustainabilityoftheprojectbenefits;

provideanassessmentofStrategicAddedValue(SAV);and

setouttheimplicationsforfutureprojects.

1.3 ApproachandMethod

Theevaluationwasstructuredanddeliveredinlinewithgoodpractice

guidancesetoutintheRDAImpactEvaluationFramework(IEF)1.

Theevaluationcomprisedthreemainelements:

adeskreviewofdocumentationanddatarelatingtotheNWDA

fundedBeaconproject;

semi-structuredface-to-faceandtelephoneinterviewswith20

stakeholdersincluding:

o projectteam;

o funders;

o ManchesterBeaconSteeringBoardmembers;and

o workinggroupmembers;

atelephoneandonlinesurveyofacademicstaffandcommunity

groupsstaff/membersinvolvedinNWDAfundedBeaconprojects.A

totalof31responseswerereceived.(N.B.thisisinadditiontothe20

stakeholderinterviewsabove).InadditiondatafromaUK-widesurveycollectedacrossallHEIsinvolvedintheBeaconsinitiative

(with356responsesfromtheManchesterBeaconHEIs)wasalso

analysed.

1

EvaluatingtheImpactofEnglandsRegionalDevelopmentAgencies:DevelopingaMethodologyandEvaluationFramework,DTIOccasionalPaperNo.2,February2006.


15/83


11

1.4 StructureoftheReport

Theremainderofthisreportisstructuredasfollows:

Section2providesanoverviewoftheManchesterBeaconinitiative,

includinggovernanceandmanagementarrangementsand

objectives;

Section3describestheBeaconprojectsfundedbytheNWDA;

Section4setsoutthefeedbackfromstakeholders;

Section5setsoutthefindingsfromthetelephoneandonlinesurvey

ofprojectbeneficiaries,andtheanalysisofthewidersurvey;

Section6reviewstheperformanceagainstNWDAandManchester

Beaconobjectives;and

Section7presentsthekeylearningpointsandrecommendations.

AseriesofcasestudiesonNWDAfundedBeaconprojectsareincluded

throughoutthereport.

AppendixAcontainsdetailsoftheManchesterBeaconobjectivesand

evidenceofsuccess.


16/83


12

2. TheManchesterBeaconThisSectionsetsoutsomebackgroundontheManchesterBeaconforPublic

Engagement.Itdescribes:

governanceandmanagementarrangements;

NWDABeaconobjectivesandfunding;

ManchesterBeaconclearObjectives;and

areasofalignmentbetweenManchesterBeaconobjectivesand

NWDAsobjectivesforsupportingBeaconactivity.

2.1 GovernanceandManagementArrangements

ASteeringBoardoverseesandguidesthedirectionoftheManchester

Beacon.

ItsmembershipconsistsoftheUniversityofManchester,theUniversityof

Salford,ManchesterMetropolitanUniversity,theMuseumofScienceand

Industry,andManchester:KnowledgeCapital.

EachofthepartnershasaprincipalinvestigatorontheSteeringBoardwhois

themainchampion(atViceChancellor,DeputyViceChancellorandProVice

Chancellorlevel)intheirorganisationfortheBeaconinitiative.Italso

comprisesotherseniorrepresentativesfromacrossthepartners.Anumber

ofworkinggroupshavealsobeenestablishedtohelpprogressareasof

importancefortheManchesterBeaconprogramme.Thegovernance

structureissetoutinFigure2.1.

Figure2.1:Governancestructure


17/83


13

TheSteeringBoardmeetsfourtimesperyearandprovidesstrategic

directionfortheBeacon,approvestheannualBeaconprogrammeof

activity,monitorsperformance,andreviewsinputfromitsWorkingGroups.

PartnersareactivelyengagedinfourWorkingGroups,including:

operations;

recognition;

evaluationandimpact;and

communications.

TheWorkingGroupsmeetatleastquarterlyperyear,involveseniorstaffandareresponsibleforprogressingactivityandsharinglearningin-between

SteeringBoardmeetings.TheGroupsinitiate,plan,deliver,andmonitor

Beaconprogrammestrandsandmonitorprogressagainsttheworkplan

(includingbudgetingandstaffing).WorkingGroupsalsoensureefficiency

andeffectivenessofalloperations,optimiseliaisonbetweenpartnersand

betweenkeyindividualactivities(e.g.website,communications,external

affairs,etc.),andsharelearningacrossthepartnership.

AManchesterBeaconprojectteamhasbeenestablishedthatare

responsiblefortheday-to-daymanagementandoperationofthe

ManchesterBeaconinitiative.

ThestaffteamincludesaCreativeDirector,aProjectManagerfromeachof

universitiesandMOSI(with2daysperweekallocatedtotheBeacon),and

anAdministratorworkingfull-timefortheBeacon.

Amatrix-managementsystemisused.Linemanagementresponsibilityfor

theProjectManagersrestswiththeirowninstitution/organisation.Theyalso

meetweeklywiththeCreativeDirectorinrelationtoBeaconactivity.

TheoverallmanagementandgovernancearrangementsareshowninFigure2.2,over.


18/83


14

Figure2.2:Overallgovernanceandmanagementarrangements

2.2 NWDABeaconObjectives

InApril2008NWDAallocated240,000forBeaconrelatedactivity.More

detailonthisfundingissetoutinSection3.

ThespecificobjectivessetbyNWDAfortheManchesterBeaconwere:

toachievesignificantlyimprovedunderstandingandappreciationof

theuniversitiesandinstitutionsinthelocalareabyresidentsofthe

localcommunitiesbyMarch2010;

toachievemuchimprovedunderstandingandappreciationof

neighbouringcommunitiesbytheuniversitiesandinstitutions;

toputinplaceanumber(intheregionoffive)ofsustainable

engagements/projectsthatinvolveacademicsworkingwithlocal

communities;


19/83


15

todevelopacadreofupto40academicswithanenthusiasmfor,and

experienceofworkingwithdeprivedcommunities;and

tohelpcatalyseanupliftinthenumberoflocalresidents(in

particularthosefromdeprivedcommunitieswithnopriorcontact

withtheHigherEducationInstitutions)withapositiveattitude

towardsworkingintheuniversitiesandothermajoremployers,or

studyingat(orwithhelpfrom)thoseHEIs:

2.3 ManchesterBeaconObjectives

AnearlystepinplanningfortheevaluationprocessoftheManchester

Beaconwastosetclearobjectivesthatreflectedtheneedsandaspirationsofallpartners.

Thearticulationofobjectiveswasinformedby:

asurveycompletedbytheSteeringBoard,ProjectTeam,Working

Groupmembers,andcommunityparticipants-thisexploredkey

priorities,evidenceofsuccess,issues,andchallenges;and

aClearObjectivesWorkshopwithstakeholders-todiscuss,refine,

andagreesharedobjectivesfortheManchesterBeaconforPublic

Engagement,includingthemedareasoffocustoguideprogrammeandprojectdevelopment.

Theidentificationofclearobjectiveshashelpedthoseinvolvedbetter

understandhowsupportedprojects/activitiescancontributetothewider

ManchesterBeaconinitiative.

FivethemesandobjectiveswerearticulatedfortheManchesterBeacon.

Thesearedescribedinmoredetailbelow:

Objective1:Publicengagementisencouraged,valuedand

supported-toestablishinternalsystemsandprocessestohelpembedpublicengagementasaroutinepartofstaffrolesand

responsibilities;

Objective2:Changeperceptionsandimproveaccessibility-to

improvethedepthofunderstandingwithinlocalcommunitiesof

whatuniversities/culturalorganisationshavetoofferandhowitcan

beaccessed,includingthedevelopmentofapositiveattitude/image;

Objective3:Increasingtherelevanceofinstitutionactivityand

connectivitywithcommunities-toimprovetheconnectivityand


20/83


16

engagementbetweenacademiaandthegeneralpublicsothat

activityisincreasinglyseenasimportantandrelevant;

Objective4:Improvetheopportunitiesforsustainabletwo-way

learning-tofostermoreintensiveandsustainablewaysofjointwork

betweenresearchandcommunities,includingtheco-creationof

researchandknowledgeexchangeinbothdirectionsandincreasing

communityinvolvementininstitutionactivity;and

Objective5:DevelopdeeperpartnershipworkingacrosstheBeacon

partnersandwiththecommunity-across-cuttingobjectivewhere

thefocusisonthecollaborativeapproachandaddedvaluethrough

collectiveworkingbetweenthepartnerorganisations.

Theprocessfurtherexploredwhatevidenceofsuccesswouldbeapparent

(i.e.howwouldweknowtheobjectivehadbeenachieved)andisshownin

AppendixA.Thisinformedamonitoringandevaluationframeworkthatwas

subsequentlydevelopedaroundthefiveobjectivestoenabletheongoing

assessmentoftheManchesterBeaconforPublicEngagement.This

continuestoberefinedandinformedbydeliveryexperience.

2.4 AlignmentofObjectives

TheoverallobjectivesandmonitoringandevaluationframeworkfortheManchesterBeaconisstronglyalignedwith,andcontributesto,NWDAs

fundingobjectivesfortheManchesterBeacon.

Table2.1setsoutthefiveobjectivesoftheNWDAfundedBeaconactivity

(NWDADevelopmentandAppraisalform),anddetailstherelationship

betweentheseobjectivesandtheclearobjectivesdevelopedaspartofthe

overallManchesterBeaconinitiative.


21/83


17

Table2.1:Alignmentbetweenobjectives

NWDAManchesterBPEObjective

ClearObjectiveContribution

Toachievesignificantlyimproved

understandingandappreciation

oftheuniversitiesandinstitutions

inthelocalareabyresidentsof

thelocalcommunitiesbyMarch

2010.

Objective2:Changeperceptionsandimprove

accessibility:Awarenessraisingactivities,provisionof

information,communicationsandthepromotionof

facilitiesandserviceswillhelptoimprovelocal

communitiesawarenessandunderstandingofthe

universities/culturalorganisations.

Toachievemuchimproved

understandingandappreciation

ofneighbouringcommunitiesby

theuniversitiesandinstitutions.

Objective5:Developdeeperpartnershipworking

acrosstheBeaconpartnersandwiththecommunity :

thereisafocusonactivitiesthatdemonstrateto

Beaconpartnersthevalueofworkingwiththe

communityandthesocialcapitalgeneratedasa

result.

Toputinplaceanumber(inthe

regionoffive)ofsustainable

engagements/projectsthat

involvesacademicsworkingwith

localcommunities.

Objective1:PEisencouraged,valuedand

supported:thereisacommitmenttothe

establishmentofsystemsandprocesses,etc.thatwill

helpembedpublicengagementasaroutinepartof

staffrolesandresponsibility.Thissupportivecontextwillencourageuniversity/culturalorganisationstaff

toengagewithcommunities.

Objective3:Increasingtherelevanceofinstitution

activityandconnectivitywithcommunities :

increasedinvolvementbetweenuniversitystaffand

communityrepresentativesineachothersevents

andactivities.

Objective4:Improvetheopportunitiesfor

sustainabletwo-waylearning: thiswillleadtomore

intensiveandsustainablejointworkingbetween

researchandcommunities.Projectactivitywill

increasetheco-creationofresearchandknowledge

exchangeinbothdirections,andtheincreased

communityinvolvementinallinstitutionactivity

includingnewbuildings,newcurriculumetc.


22/83


18


acrosstheBeaconpartnersandwiththecommunity

thereisafocusonincreasedpartnershipworking,sharingofexpertise(internalandexternalPE)and

projectswhichinvolvejointworkingat

project/communitylevel.

Todevelopacadreofupto40

academicswithanenthusiasm

for,andexperienceofworking

withdeprivedcommunities:

Objective1:PEisencouraged,valuedandsupported

thereisacommitmenttotheestablishmentof

systemsandprocesses,etc.thatwillhelpembed

publicengagementasaroutinepartofstaffrolesand

responsibility.

Objective3:Increasingtherelevanceofinstitution

activityandconnectivitywithcommunities :

increasedinvolvementbetweenuniversitystaffand

communityrepresentativesineachothersevents

andactivities.

Objective4:Improvetheopportunitiesfor

sustainabletwo-waylearning: thiswillleadtomore

intensiveandsustainablejointworkingbetween

researchandcommunities.Projectactivitywill

increasetheco-creationofresearchandknowledgeexchangeinbothdirections,andtheincreased

communityinvolvementinallinstitutionactivity

includingnewbuildings,newcurriculumetc.


acrosstheBeaconpartnersandwiththecommunity

thereisafocusonincreasedpartnershipworking,

sharingofexpertise(internalandexternalPE)and

projectswhichinvolvejointworkingat

project/communitylevel.

Tohelpcatalyseanupliftinthe

numberoflocalresidents(in

particularthosefromdeprived

communitieswithnoprior

contactwiththeHEIs)witha

positiveattitudetowardsworking

intheuniversitiesandother

majoremployers,orstudyingat

(orwithhelpfrom)thoseHEIs:

Objective2:Changeperceptionsandimprove

accessibility: projectsseektodevelopapositive

attitudetowards,andimprovetheimageof,the

participatingorganisationsbythecommunity,

thereby,increasingcommunityaccessand

understanding;

Objective3:increasingtherelevanceofinstitution

activityandconnectivitywithcommunities: activities

willseektoincreasetheinvolvementbetween

universitystaffandcommunityrepresentativesin

eachotherseventsandactivities.


23/83


19

3. SupportedActivityThisSectionprovidesanoverviewoftheprojectsfundedthroughtheNWDA

andotheractivitiesthatsupporttheoverallManchesterBeaconinitiative.

ThefocushasbeenonencouragingculturechangeinthewayHEIs,their

staff,andtheirstudentsreachout,listen,andengagewiththepublic

3.1 Funding

TheNWDAcontributed240,000towardsthesevenprojectsdescribedbelow.Fundinghasbeenusedtocoverstaffcostsandassociatedproject

activity.Table3.1providesabreakdown.

Table3.1:NWDAtotalfunding

Activity 2007/08 2008/2009 2009/10 Total

Staffcosts - 40,000 40,000 80,000

Pilotprojects,

events,

evaluation

10,000 70,000 80,000 160,000

Total 10,000 110,000 120,000 240,000Source:NWDAGrantOfferLetter,dated19December2008.

Table3.2showsthebudgetcontributionfromallfunders.

Table3.2:Partnerandfunderscontributions

Budget(000)

Source:

NWDA 240

HEFCE 1,200

Otherpartners

contributions 720

Total 2,160


24/83


20

Table3.3reviewsthebudgetallocationandexpenditureforNWDAfunding.

ActualexpenditureforthisprojecthasbeenauditedbyDeloitteLLP.

Table3.3:Capital,revenueandexpendituredetails

Budget Expenditure Variance

Source: Cap Rev Cap Rev Cap Rev

NWDA 240,000 240,000 0

Source:NWDAExitreport,June2010.

3.2 TheProjectsFiveprojectsweredirectlyfundedthroughNWDA.Itisworthnotingthat

severaloftheprojectsinvolvedanumberofdiscreteprojects/engagements

involvingacademicsandthecommunity.Abriefdescriptionissetoutbelow

andmoredetailedcasestudiesareincludedthroughoutthereport:

CulturalSeedAwards(September2009-April2010)-thisproject

consistedoffiveknowledgeexchangepilotprojectswhichwere

designedtopromotepartnershipworkingbetweenculturalassets,

communitygroups,andartsandhumanitiesresearchers/staff; CommunityScienceAwards(OctobertoNovember2009)-four

engagementawardsweremadetouniversitystaffandcommunity

groupstoworkinpartnershiptodevelopactivitytoengagediverse

audiencesattheManchesterScienceFestival.Topicareasincluded

chemistry,atmosphericandenvironmentalscience,andastronomy

witheventsandactivitiesdeliveredincommunitysettings;

DevelopmentAwards(MaytoNovember2009)-toaddresskey

institutionalculturechangeprioritiesidentifiedbyastrategicstaff

engagementevent,ninesmalldevelopmentawardsorquickwin

projectsweresupportedtodemonstratehowthelongtermgoalof

valuingpublicengagementofeverydayuniversitylifecouldbe

achieved;

Manchester(JulytoNovember2008)-ArcSpacewasthewinning

projectchosenfromfourundertheMappingCreativityinitial

engagementactivity.AHulme-basedcreativeclusterwassetupby

communityartistsinStWilfred'senterprisecentretofosterand

supportcreativeandethicalexchangebetweenacademics,creatives

andcommunitygroups;and


25/83


21

CommunityLeadership(March2009toAugust2010)-aUniversity-

communitypartnershipprogrammetodeveloptheleadershipskills

of30Manchesterresidentsandorganisationaldevelopmentwithinthethirdsector.Theprojectaimedtoincreaserelevanceforcivic,

community,businessandculturalpartnersthroughorganisational

developmentandpersonaldevelopment.Twoprojectswere

delivered:StepUpandInspiringLeaders.

NWDAfundingalsosupportedanumberofotherprojectsandactivities.

Theseprojectshaveleveredinfundingfromelsewhere(i.e.MMUforthe

PublicEngagementFellowships)fordelivery,withtheManchesterBeacon

facilitatingnetworking,groupmeetings,supportetc.Thesehavecontributed

stronglytotheobjectivesoftheManchesterBeacon:

MMUPEFellowships(September2008toNovember2009)-thiswas

establishedtofundgenuinetwowayengagementprojectsto

addressrealneedsidentifiedbylocalcommunities.Sixpublic

engagementprojectswereestablishedopeninguptwo-way

knowledgeexchangeandexpertisewithManchesterresidentsand

communitygroups.Theseintergenerationalandintercultural

projectsspannedarangeofdisciplinesincludingArtandDesign,

Computing,Microbiology,andSocialResearch.Thesixprojectswere:

o HulmeSweetHulmeo MovingMemories

o ManchesterMethods

o MossSideStories

o TheManchesterConferenceforBlackParents,Children&

YoungPeople

o WebAngels

NetworkingProgramme-Thissupportedarangeofactivity,

especiallyintheearlylisteningphaseoftheprogramme,which

helpedidentifyneedsandinformthedesignoffutureprojects,as

wellasbuildinganinitiallevelofengagementandconnectivity.Examplesincludedtwokeyprojects:

o Comixed-designedasawayofbringingdifferentpeople

togethertoexploreideascollaborativelyusingsocialmedia.

ThefirstComixedresearchwasthemedaroundscienceand

wasplannedtotieintotheManchesterScienceFestival.The

projectwasdeliveredinassociationwiththeResearch

CouncilsUKbecauseittooksomeoftheRCUKscross-cutting

scientificchallengesasastartingpointfordiscussions.Issues


26/83


27/83


23

Connectivity-CulturalSeedAward

CulturalSeedAwardsincludedfiveknowledgeexchangepilotprojectsdesignedto

promotepartnershipworkingandlearningbetweenculturalassets,communitygroups,and

artsandhumanitiesresearchers/staff.Thiswasinformedbyaninitialworkshopsession

lookingattheperceptionsofbarrierstoengagementandpartnershipworking.Fundingfor

CulturalSeedAwardswas7,380.TheManchesterBeaconisdoingtrulyinnovativework.

Thesepilotprojectscouldfeedintohowresearchcouncilskickstartthesepartnerships.

BAAGS(Barriers,Access,Aspirations,Gaps) wasledbyTheLouiseDa-CocodiaEducation

Trust,MMUandZionArtsCentre.Fundingof1,500wasusedtorunparticipatoryand

engagementworkshopswithyoungpeople(13-25years)fromSouthManchesterto

identifygaps,barriers,andaccesstoeducation,trainingandemploymentopportunities-

thisprojectwasthefirsttimeIhavetalkedaboutmyfuture,itmademethinkwhatIwant

todomoreseriously.

TheExploringYemeniCommunityHistoryinSalford projectwasledbytheYemeni

CommunityAssociation,theArtsUnit(UoS),andtheAhmedIqbalUllahEducationTrust.

Fundingof1,380wasusedtoprogressasurveyoftheYemeniCommunityusing

participatoryworkshops,andaseriesofmeetingstoencouragethelocalcommunitytoput

forwardideasandshapefutureactivity.

DisusedBuildingsactivitywasledbyManchesterCreativeCollectives,InstituteofSocial&

SpatialTransformation(MMU),andManchesterArchitectureandDesignFestival.Funding

of1,500wasusedtoengagewiththecommunitytoexplorehowdisusedbuildingsin

Hulmemightbeusedbythecommunity.

CollectingThoughtswasledbyZionArtsCentre,ManchesterSchoolofArt(MMU)and

MMUSpecialCollections.Fundingof1,500wasusedtodevelopaninformalspaceanda

methodologyforsustainableconversationsbetweenpeopleinuniversities,communities

andculturalvenues.Itsoughttobuildtrustanddeepenrelationshipsbyestablishingajoint

forumtoexchangeideasanddialogueandincreasethenumberofresidentsinvolvedin

universitiesandculturalactivities.Oneofthegreatachievementshasbeenthecreationof

anetworkofpotentialcollaborators.

MigrationResearchPanelwasledbytheGreaterManchesterForumforEuropean

Migrants,SalfordHousing&UrbanStudiesUnit(UoS)andSEVAManchester.Itfocussedonsharingthefindingsofrecentstudiesinmigrationtogetthecommunitiesviewonkey

issuesandgapswherefurtherresearchisrequired.Fundingof1,500wasprovidedby

HEFCEandprojectleadsweresupportedthroughsupportnetworkingmeetings

NWDAfundingwasusedtofundsupportnetworkmeetingsacrosstheprojectsincludinga

finaldisseminationeventand3supportmeetingswithaBeaconprojectmanager.Awide

rangeofimpactswerereportedbyprojectparticipantsincluding:aclearerunderstanding

oftheopportunitiestocollaborateinpartnershipwithothersectors;newlinkswithlocal

communitygroups,universitiesandculturalorganisations;increasedaccessibility;and

increasedconfidence.


28/83


24

4. FeedbackfromStakeholdersThisSectiondrawstogethertheresponsesfromarangeofone-to-one

consultationswithstakeholders,deliverypartnersandfundersincludingthe

ManchesterBeaconteam,membersoftheLeadershipGroup,the

OperationsGroup,theCommunicationsGroup,theBeaconteamandwider

partnersandstakeholders.

4.1 Role

Indepthconsultationtookplacewith20differentpartnersandstakeholders

whohadvariouslengthsofengagementwiththeBeacon.Somehadbeen

involvedfromtheveryearlystagesofbiddevelopment,whilstothershadbecomeinvolvedmorerecentlybecauseofthespecificsoftheirroleor

throughinvolvementwithprojectsanddisseminationsevents.Notethat,

becauseofthisvarietyitwasnotrelevantforallrespondentstoanswer

everyquestion.

4.2 Rationale

Therewasvarietyofunderstandingofthestrategicrationaleandneedfor

theBeaconinManchester.Themainfocuswasfelttobe:

bringingahigherpriority,andcoordinatedfocustoPEactivitywithin

theuniversities,includingexplicitlyrecognisingthevalueofPEand

sharinglearninginthisarea;

theopportunitytoworkmoreeffectivelyinpartnership,including

buildingnewpartnerships;

improvingtheperceptionoftheinstitutionswiththelocal

community;and

engagingactivelywiththelocalcommunityinco-creation.

4.3 PerformanceagainstExpectations

IngeneraltheBeaconwasfelttohaveperformedwellagainstexpectations.

Therewassomefrustrationattheinitialstageswiththeemphasisonsetting

up,listeningandraisingawarenessratherthandelivery.Howeverthisis

viewedinretrospecttohavebeenapositivewiththequalityofresultant

activityimprovedforhavingtakenthatinitialtimeforpreparationand

consultation.


29/83


25

4.3.1Challenges

Workinginpartnershipwithanumberofpartnersandbuildingthose

partnershipswashighlightedasachallenge.Thisisexploredthroughoutsection4.5below.

TheManchesterBeaconisaculturechangeprogramme,anditwas

highlightedthatchangingbehaviourisbothlongtermandchallenging.Also

thesheersizeoftheinstitutionsinvolved,andthefactthatthisagenda

permeatesallaspectsoftheinstitution,especiallywhencomparedwiththe

sizeoftheteam,meansthatafurtherchallengeisthehugeamountofwork

tobedone.

Engagingwiththecommunitywasalsohighlightedasanissue.Itwas

reportedthatthecommunityingeneralviewstheuniversitiesintheir

localitywithsomeapprehension.Relationshipsthereforehavetobebuiltfor

trusttodevelopandengagementactivitytobeinitiatedtoovercomethat

apprehension.

WhilstPEisbecomingahigheragendaitemforuniversities,respondents

highlightedthatitisstillviewedasnotasimportantasresearch,and

teaching.Thereweresomefearsexpressedthatwhilstmuchprogresshas

beenmade,therewerestillthosewhoviewedPEasaboxtickingelement

ratherthangivingittheprioritythatitshouldbewithintheuniversities.

4.3.2Managementanddelivery

Themanagementanddeliveryoftheprogrammeisviewedtobeeffective

andtheprojectisfelttobewellmanaged.Themanagementandgovernance

structures(withthevariouscommitteesandworkinggroups)tookawhileto

beorganised,exacerbatedbychangesinpersonnel,butarenowviewedto

beworkingwell.

Theteamingeneraliscreditedwithdrivingforwardtheprojectsuccessfully.

Theapproachisviewedtohavebeencreative,energetic,ifchallenging.

Thematrixmanagementstructurehascausedsomeissues.Whilstpositivein

that,theteammembersareallembeddedwithintheirorganisation,andas

suchunderstandeachseparateculture,itischallengingtoalsobetryingto

workasateamandeffectivelytrytoaligntwoagendas.

Thesupportfromseniorchampionsacrossthepartnersisseenascrucialand

hasbeenverystronglyendorsedwithintheManchesterBeacon.


30/83


26

Otherchallengesraisedwerethetimetakenforsetup,includingrecruiting

ofstaff,andtheneedforearlierdefiningthepurposeandobjectivesofthe

programmeaswellasroles(especiallybetweennationalandManchester

teams).

Mostcommentsalsofocusedoncapturingthelearningatanearlystageto

maximiseimpact.

4.4Objective1PEisEncouragedandSupported

4.4.1Impactonworkpriorities

TheworkoftheBeaconwasfelttohavestronglyinfluencedonthePEprioritiesoftheorganisation,especiallyatastrategiclevel.PEwasevidentin

strategicdocuments,facultyplans,grantapplications,specificappointments

andisalsobeingbuiltintopromotionsandperformancecriteriaacrossthe

institutions.

MoreprofoundlytheapproachandmethodologyusedbytheBeaconhas

beenadoptedbytheorganisationsinotherPublicandcommunity

engagementendeavours.Amajorexampleofthisistheapproachtakenin

theMMUBirleyFieldsinvestmenttoengagewiththelocalcommunity,

wherePEisbuiltintotheactionplan.

4.4.2ChangeinunderstandingofPEamongststaff

AsshowninFigure4.1,94%ofthosewhorespondedfeltthattherehad

beenapositivechangeintheunderstandingandappreciationofPEamong

staffintheirinstitution(31%verymuch),withalargerproportionreporting

apositivechangefortheirownpersonalunderstandingandappreciation.


31/83


27

Figure4.1:Towhatextenthastherebeenachangeintheunderstanding&

appreciationofPE

Note:N=14and15

RespondentsdescribedincreasedfocusandenergyforPEandtalkedofa

cultureshiftwithintheirinstitutions.

Howeverduetothesizeoftheorganisations,itwashighlightedthatnotall

staffhadundergonethatshift.FormanypeoplePEisstillanoptionalactivity.

4.5 Objective5:DeeperPartnershipWorking

4.5.1Partnershipaddedvalue

Althoughthereisalonghistoryofpartnershipworkingbetweensomeofthe

partners,newrelationshipshadbeenbuiltbecauseoftheBeacon.Itwas

highlightedthateachofthepartnersbringsdifferentstrengths,whichisapositive,butequallytheyallhadslightlydifferingagendas,whichcanbea

challenge.Howeveringeneralthepartnershipworkingandsharingof

differentexperiencesandapproacheswasseentohaveaddedvaluetothe

outcomesoftheprogramme,andincreasedlearning.

MOSIinclusionasaculturalpartnerwasviewedtohaveaddedagreatdeal

totheprogramme,bringingadifferentperspective,hugeamountofPE

professionalismandexpertise.Furthermore,M:KCssupportingrole,civic

linksandunderstandingoftheBeaconsinnovativeapproacheshasbeen


32/83


28

pivotalinhelpingtoengagemorebroadlyandlinkstrategicallywithother

actorsintheregion(notleastNWDA).

Ataprojectleveltherewassporadicevidenceofpartnershipworking,withthemajorityofprojectsstillbeingdeliveredatindividualinstitutions.

4.5.2Furtherpartnershipactivity

AsshowninFigure4.2,86%ofthosewhorespondedagreedthatasaresult

oftheBeacon,newpartnershipsbeyondtheBeaconpartnershadbeen

established,with93%alsoevidencingfurthercollaborationbetweenthe

Beaconpartners.

Figure4.2:HastheBeaconInitiativeledtofurtherpartnershipactivitywhichdidnotexistbefore?

Note:N=14and15

ExamplesgivenincludedtheresponsetotheWellingsStatementacrosstheuniversities,otherjointfundingbids,ArcSpaceandrenewableenergieswork

aswellasthesuccessoftheScienceFestivalinput.

4.5.3Catalysedotheractivity

Themajority(93%)ofrespondentsagreedthattheBeaconhadcatalysed

other/furtheractivityasshowninFigure4.3.


33/83


29

Figure4.3:TowhatextenthastheBeaconcatalysedother/furtheractivity?

Note:N=14

Althoughitwasidentifiedthattherewasalotofactivitypreviouslyinplace,

andthereforewasdifficulttoquantify,therespondentsfeltthattheBeacon

washavingakeyinfluence.

ThebrokerageroleoftheBeaconinnetworkingwithnetworksandmaking

thoselinkagesthatcouldthenleadtofurtheractivitywasviewedtobeanimportantelementtothesuccessfulapproach.

4.5.4Changedrelationshipsbetweenpartners

Althoughtherehadalreadybeenexistingpartnershiprelationships,85%of

thosewhorespondedfeltthatasaresultoftheBeacontherelationship

betweenthepartnershadseenapositivechange.Althoughnot

fundamentallychangeditwasdescribedasbeingdeeperandbroaderwith

moresharingandtrustandinvolvingawidergroupofpeople.

4.5.5Changedrelationshipwithcommunity

Regardingrelationshipswiththecommunity,88%feltthattheBeaconhad

helpedchangetherelationshipinapositiveway,althoughitwas

acknowledgedtobestillearlydaysinthisrespect.Itwasfeltbysometobe

variableacrosstheuniversities,andstillfocusedoncommunityleadersand

representativesratherthanthewidercommunity.Severalrespondents

highlightedthatmuchmorecouldbedoneinthisarea.


34/83


30

However,positivelyitwasfeltthattheapproachhaschangedfromdoing

thistopeopletoco-creationandanimprovingsenseoftreatingallas

equals.Thiswastobeencouraged.

Inadditiontherewasviewedtobeabetterunderstandingaboutthe

diversityandrichnessofthecommunity,whichinformedengagement

practices.

ItwasfeltthattheBeaconteamhadbuiltgoodrelationshipswiththe

community,butthatwasnotnecessarilyseenasconnectedtotheirhost

institution,i.e.theteamhadmadethoserelationshipsratherthanthe

institutions.

4.6 OtherManchesterBeaconObjectives

4.6.1Evidenceofchange

TherespondentswereaskedaboutprogresstowardsotherBeacon

objectivesincludingimage,access,jointactivitiesandrelevance.Table4.1

showstheresponses.

Table4.1:Pleasedescribewhatchangesyouhaveobservedandtowhat

extenttheBeaconinfluencedthischange

Imageofthe

learning

organisation

Improved

accesstothe

facilities

whichhave

notbeen

accessibleto

thepublic

before

Numberof

people

accessing

facilities

Thelearning

organisationis

undertaking

moreactivities

togetherwith

thelocal

community

Thelearning

organisation

hasbecome

more

important

andrelevant

tothelocal

community

Improvedvery

much 0% 0% 7% 33% 13%

Improvedtosome

extent 87% 87% 87% 67% 80%

Notchangedatall 7% 7% 0% 0% 0%

Changedtothe

negative 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Dontknow 7% 7% 7% 0% 7%

Note:N=15

Ingeneralalloftheseaspectswerefelttohaveimprovedtosomeextent

duetotheinfluenceoftheBeacon.Therewasunanimityinthefactthat

therearemoreactivitiestakingplacetogetherwiththelocalcommunity.

Accesstofacilitieswasseenasamoredifficultissue,butthatimprovement

hadbeenmadeincertainareasalthoughtherewasseentobemore


35/83


31

progresstobemadehere.87%ofthosewhorespondedfeltthattheimage

oftheorganisationshadimprovedwiththecommunity,with93%feeling

thattheinstitutionsweremoreimportantandrelevanttothelocal

communities.

Itwascommentedthataudiencesandparticipationofuniversity

engagementactivitywasmorediversethanpreviouslyandthatthis

observationwasanindicationofimprovementsacrosstheseelements.

4.6.2Unexpectedimpacts

AnumberofunexpectedbenefitsfromtheBeaconprogrammewere

highlighted,includingtheinfluenceinapproachtoothercommunity

engagementelements(e.g.MMUsapproachtoengagementaroundtheBirleyfieldscampusdevelopment),andhowPEisanissuenotjustfor

academicstaff,butpermeatesacrosstheorganisations.

Thediversityofapproacheswasviewedasbeingrefreshing,andtheBeacon

wasalsohighlightedasbeinganexcellentvehicleforpromoting

communicationandcollaborationacrosstheinstitutions.

Inadditionitwascommentedthatthelevelofinterestandparticipation

fromthecommunitywasaboveexpectations,althoughitwasalso

acknowledgedthattherearemanydifferentactivitiesandinfluences

underwayoverandabovetheBeaconprogramme,sotheattributionofthe

Beaconinthiswasdifficulttoquantify.

4.7 Additionality

AlloftherespondentsfeltthatiftheBeaconhadnotexisted,althoughsome

oftheprojectswouldstillhavehappened,theywouldhavebeenoflower

quality,oflesserimpactandslowertobedelivered.

4.7.1Widerbenefits

TheBeaconwasalsofelttobecontributingtowiderbenefits,including

leadinglearningonPE,developingthecapabilityofkeyplayersand

establishingManchesterasacentreofgoodpracticeasshowninFigure4.4.


36/83


32

Figure4.4:TowhatextentistheBeacondelivering/contributingtowider

benefits?

Note:N=14,15and15,respectively

AlthoughtheBeaconisasmallinitiative,anditwashighlightedthatthe

outcomesneedtobeviewedinproportiontothis,theManchesterBeacon

wasfelttobecontributinginnovativeanddiverselearningtotheapproach

ofPEacrossthenationalBeaconprogrammeandwithintheinstitutions

involved.

4.8 ValueforMoney

TheinvestmentintheBeaconisrelativelysmall,andyetitwasviewedby

respondentsashavinghadalargeimpact,especiallythroughinfluencingand

catalysingfurtherbenefits,andreachingahighnumberofpeople.

Ataprojectlevel,onlysmallamountsofmoneywereinvestedinindividual

projects,andthishelpedlegitimiseandrecognisePEactivity.Fromthe

programmeleveltheinvestmenthadleveragedinfurtherfundingandalargeamountofotherresource(includingstafftimeetc.).

Itwascommentedthattheprogrammeitselfdoesntgenerateincome,but

thatitcontributedtowiderstrategicagendasandhelpedstimulate

movementinthecultureoftheorganisations.


37/83


33

4.9 FutureDevelopmentIssuesandOpportunities

4.9.1InnexttwoyearsThemainfocusfortheBeaconuntiltheendofthecurrentfundingwasfelt

tobetobuildonthegoodworkthathadbeendoneandtoembedthe

changeofcultureandreinforcethebehavioursacrosstheinstitutions,so

thattheimpactcanbesustained.

MainstreamingPEandbroadeningengagementbeyondtheinitial

enthusiastswasalsoviewedtobeimportant,aswellasexploringmorejoint

projects.

4.9.2BeyondthecompletionoftheBeacon

Sustainabilityquestionsarealreadybeingaddressedindiscussionswithin

theworkinggroups.Itwasacknowledgedthatthereisademandandenergy

builtthroughtheexistingactivitythatwillbetoanextentself-sustaining,but

thathavingraisedexpectationsthereisachallengeinmeetingthoseand

keepingprogressmovingforwardifthecoreteamfocusisnolongerthere.

However,inatimeoffundingrestrictionsthemaintenanceoftheteaminits

currentformwasfelttobeunlikelyandnotinkeepingwiththeagendato

mainstreamPE.

Awellasactionacrossthepartners,ensuringthattheresearchfunders

makePEanintegralpartoffundingawardswillhelpincentiviseandreward

PEactivity,andshouldbeembeddedandmonitoredaspartofgrantaward

criteria.


38/83


34

Community-CommunityScienceAwards

Followinganapplicationandselectionprocess,theManchesterBeaconawardedfoursmall

grants(500each)toacademics,researchers,museumstaff,andcommunitygroupsto

worktogethertodelivercommunityengagementactivitiesduringtheManchesterScience

Festivalwhichtookplacebetween24Octoberand1November2009.Thiswaswithaview

togeneratingagreaterinterestinscienceeventsamongmembersofthecommunity.

TheManchesterBeaconCommunityScienceAwardswereagreatcontributiontothe

ManchesterScienceFestivalandhelpedusopenuptheFestivaltomorepeoplewithinhard

toreachaudiences

TheSchoolofEnvironmentandLifeSciencesattheUniversityofSalforddelivereda

chemistrydemonstrationformembersofthecommunityattheStSebastiansCommunity

CentreinSalford.Thisinteractivesessionsoughttoinspireandinvigoratethosethatattendedaboutchemicalsciencesaswellaseducatethemonconceptssuchastheatom,

elements,compounds,andthechemicalphysicalproperties- manythanksforsuchan

entertaining,engagingandeducativeshow,itwasveryinspirational,especiallyforkids.

TheCentreforAtmosphericScienceattheUniversityofManchesterinvolvedmembersof

thecommunityinresearchintoweeklycyclesofrainfall,andinparticularwhetheritrains

moreatweekends.Itwasconsideredtobeafuntopicthatthecommunitywouldengagein

whilststillhavinglegitimatesciencebehindit.Membersofthecommunitycollecteddata

usingraingaugesandwereinvitedtotakepartinaworkshopduringtheManchester

ScienceFestivaltoanalysethedataandperformanexperimenttoguidetheirfindings.

TheRobyCommunityCentreinLongsightorganisedavisitformembersofthecommunity

tovisittheJodrellBankObservatoryforAstrophysicswhichformspartoftheUniversityof

Manchester.AmemberofstafffromJodrellBankwasalsoinvitedtogiveatalkabouttheir

workduringwhichlocalpeoplehadtheopportunitytoaskquestionsabouttheirroleand

workattheObservatory-itwasgreattoreceivethesupportfromtheManchesterBeacon

toorganisethetriptoJodrellBankforourSouthAsianMensGroup.

OMEGA(ManchesterMetropolitanUniversity) isapubliclyfundedpartnershipthatoffers

impartial, innovative and insights into the environmental effects of the air transport

industry andsustainabilitysolutions.OMEGAusedthe fundingtoprovidean information

and activity stand at the Manchester Science Festival where people could learn aboutaviationandcarbonoffsetting.Theoverallaimwastodirectlymakeuseofoutputfroman

OMEGA study tohelp peopleunderstand carbonoffsettingandhowinvestment in such

schemescanbringclimatechangebenefitswhentheychoosetofly. Intotal600peopleattendedtheevents.72%ofattendeesthatcompletedanevaluation

formratedtheeventsasexcellent.Themainreportedimpactsonparticipantswerethat

academicsandcommunitygroupsreceivedsupporttodelivercommunityengagement

activitiesanditprovidednetworkingopportunities.Plansareunderwayinrelationto

furtherengagementactivitiesfortheManchesterScienceFestival2010.


39/83


35

5. FeedbackfromParticipantsThisSectionsetsoutfeedbackfromthetelephoneandonlinesurveysof

individualsthatengagedintheNWDAfundedBeaconprojects.

Wealsoreviewedsurveyresponses,providedbyparticipatingManchester

universitiesstaff,totheannualsurveyundertakenbyOakleigh(aspartof

thenationalevaluationofBeacons).Thiswasalargersurveyofstaffbeyond

thosewhohadbeeninvolvedinManchesterBeaconprojectsandactivity.

5.1 Background

Atotalof12indepthtelephoneinterviewswereundertakenwiththose

directlyinvolvedinthedeliveryofprojects.Themajorityoftheseproject

leadswereuniversitystaff.

Thetelephonesurveywassupplementedwithanonlinesurveyofwider

beneficiaries,includingotherstaff,localresidentsandcommunitygroups.

Thoseconsultedthroughthetelephonesurveywereaskediftheywouldbe

willingtopasstheonlinesurveytothosethathadengagedintheprojects.

Notalloftheprojectleadshadcontactdetailsforthosethatparticipated,an

issuewhichrequirestobeaddressedinfuture,toensurethattheimpactson

participantsarecapturedinatimelyfashion.Atotalof19onlineresponseswerereceived.

Atotalof31responseswerereceivedoverallfromthesurveyworkwhich

soughttoestablishthe:

impactsfromtheirpersonalexperience;

learningandpersonalbenefitsderivedfrominvolvement;

changesthattheprojectshaveresultedin;

futureengagementactivity;and suggestionsforhowbesttofurthersupportpublicengagement

activity.

Feedbackfromuniversitystaffandlocalresidents/communitygroupsare

reportedonseparatelyinthefollowingsections.


40/83


36

5.2 FeedbackfromUniversityStaff

5.2.1ProfileofrespondentsAtotalof13responseswerereceivedfromuniversitystaff.Aspreadof

responseswerereceivedfromsenioracademics,senior

lecturers/researchers,management,andsupportstaff.Thisispositiveasit

highlightsthebreadthofengagementinBeaconactivityacrossdifferent

levelsofstaffwithinuniversities.

Thoseconsultedhadbeeninvolvedinoneofthesevenprojectsdescribedin

Section3thatreceivedNWDAfunding.

5.2.2Impactsfrompersonalexperience

Universitystaffwereaskedtoconsidertheextenttowhichtheyagreeor

disagreewithaseriesofstatementsregardingtheirpersonalexperiencein

theprojects.Figure5.1setsoutresponses.

Figure5.1:Impactsfrompersonalexperienceintheprojects

N=13(P.E.-PublicEngagement)


41/83


37

Overall,universitystaffwerehighlypositiveabouttheimpactoftheir

involvement.

Allstaffagreedthattheyhadabetterunderstandingofthelocalcommunityandgroupsfollowinginvolvementintheprojects.Almostallstaffreported

increasedpublicengagementsskillsandanimprovementinthequalityof

theirwork(92%each).

Asmallnumberofstaffdisagreedwiththestatements-thehighestreported

levelofdisagreementwas15%(tworesponses)inrelationtoallocating

moretimeandfeelingmoresupportedtoundertakepublicengagement

activity.

5.2.3BenefitsfromparticipationStaffwereaskedtospecifythenatureofanylearningbenefitsgainedfrom

participatingintheprojects.Figure5.2setsoutresponses.

Figure5.2:Learningbenefits

N=13

Staffwereoverwhelminglypositiveaboutthelearningbenefitstheyderived

fromparticipatingintheprojects.

Allstaff(oralmostallstaff)reportedthattheygainednewknowledge,new

skills,betterawarenessofrelevantissues,andimprovedqualityofwork


42/83


38

fromengagementinBeaconprojects.Otherbenefitsreportedincluded

developingnewpartnershipsandmakingfriends.

Staffwentontoreportawiderangeofbenefitsfromtheirinvolvementinprojects.Themainbenefitscitedincludethedevelopmentofnew

relationshipsandcontacts(100%),thattheexperiencewasfunandbrought

enjoyment(85%),andincreasedconfidence(69%).Figure5.3setsout

responses.

Figure5.3:Personalbenefitsgainedfromparticipation

Note:N=13(Percentagestotalmorethan100%duetomultipleresponses)

Universitystaffreportedavarietyofunanticipatedbenefitsarisingfrom

theirinvolvement.Thisincluded:

abetterappreciationofthescopeandvalueofpublicengagement

andoftwo-wayengagementinparticular;

abetterunderstandingofdifferentapproachesandmethodsof

publicengagement;

recognitionoftheircontributionfromcolleaguesandotherpeople;

increasedengagementwithotheruniversitystaffthattheyhadno

previouscontactwith;

establishmentoflong-lastingpartnerships;


43/83


39

thevalueofsecuringdifferentperspectivesfromtheinvolvementof

otherpeople;

mediacoverage;and

thedevelopmentofnewideas.

5.2.4Negativeeffects

Whileinvolvementwasratedpositivelyoverall,afewcommentswere

providedaroundnegativeeffectsresultingfromparticipatingintheproject,

including:

canbetimeconsuming(e.g.workingweekends/longerhours);

contributionnotacknowledged(e.g.notimeinlieu);

disconnectbetweenapproachestopublicengagementwouldliketo

haveusedcomparedtowhattheuniversitywascomfortablewith;

sometimesviewedasofsecondaryimportance;and

administrationdetailsandprocedures(e.g.slowpaymentprocesses).

5.2.5Futureaction

Itisenvisagedthatinvolvementinpublicengagementactivitywillleadonto

furtherrelatedaction.

Itisthereforepositivethatthemajorityofstaffhavealreadyusedtheskills

andexperiencesgainedfromtheprojectsinfurtheractivity(62%),withthe

remainderreportingthattheyplantodosointhefuture(38%).Figure5.4

setsoutresponses.


44/83


40

Figure5.4:Futureactiontakenorplanned

N=13,13,13,11

Themajorityofstaffreportedthattheyhadalreadyorplannedtoinvolve

morecommunitymembersinacademicworkforco-creationandknowledge

exchangeandgetfurtherinvolvedinprojectswiththecommunity(85%and

76%respectively).

Viewsweremoremixed,howeveronwhetherstaffwouldbecomea

representativeonalocalcommunityforumorgroups-45%werenotsure

andafurther18%saidthatthiswasunlikelytohappen.

5.2.6Improvingperceptions,accessibilityandwiderchanges

Staffwereaskedforviewsonwhethertheprojectshadanimpacton

improvingtheperceptionandaccessibilityoftheuniversity/cultural

organisation-fromtheirperspectiveaswellthatofthelocalcommunity.

Figure5.5setsoutresponses.


45/83


41

Figure5.5:Improvingperceptions

N=13,13,13,9,9,12,7

Inthemain,staffwerepositiveaboutthechangesinperceptions,etc.

resultingfromthesupportedprojects.

Moststaffwereoftheviewthattheuniversity/culturalorganisationhada

betterunderstandingofthelocalcommunity(93%reportedsome

extent/verymuch),thatthepolicyoftheuniversity/culturalorganisation

towardspublicengagementhadimproved(77%someextent/verymuch),

andthatthelocalcommunityhadanimprovedperceptionofthe

university/culturalorganisation(61%someextent/verymuch).


46/83


42

Staffwerethenaskedtospecifywiderchangesresultingfromtheprojects.

Figure5.6setsoutresponses.

Figure5.6:Resultingchangesarisingfromprojects

N=8,12,12,12,11,11

FromtheFigureabove,ofthosethatrespondeditcanbeseenthatallhave

participatedinfurtherresearchandknowledgeexchangeactivities.

Staffwerealsopositiveabouttheextenttowhichconnectionsandthe

relationshipbetweentheuniversity/culturalorganisationandthelocal

communityhadimproved-92%and83%reportingthattherehadbeena

positiveshiftrespectively(someextent/verymuch).

Staffweremorelikelytoreportthattheywerenotparticipatinginajoint

forumtoimprovethedialoguebetweenthelearningorganisationsandthe

localcommunity(55%).


47/83


43

5.2.7Supportingfutureengagementactivity

Staffprovidedarangeofrecommendationsfordecision-makerswithin

universities/culturalorganisationstofosterfurtherengagementactivitywithlocalcommunities.

Somesuggestionsincluded:

timeisthebiggestbarrier-somestaffundertakeengagementwork

intheirowntime;

focusofuniversitiesisonresearchandgettingpaperspublished-

needstobegreaterexplicitsupporttoenablestafftofeelthatthey

cangetinvolved;

itisnotfullyrecognisedorvaluedyetwithinuniversities-whilesome

staffmentionedthatithasbecomehigherprofileandmoreexplicitin

plans,etc,itneedstobeembeddedinHRpolicies(job

roles/descriptions,rewardandrecognition,researchfundingetc)and

supportedbystaffatalllevels;

fundingisimportantforprojects-givencutsineducationsector

budgetsandcompetingprioritiesthereneedstobeareal

commitmentandprioritygiventoengagementactivity;

grantsize-smallscalefundingmadeitdifficulttocoveractualcosts

oftheproject,needtoberealisticaboutwhatcanbedelivered;

thererequirestobeagreaternumberofsenioracademicsinvolved

andleadingonactivities;

developmentofane-forumormailinglistthatmakesiteasierfor

thoseinvolvedtolinkwithothers;

relevanttrainingforstaff;and

supportedactivityshouldnotbeone-off-thereisariskthatitcould

beviewedastokenistic.

5.3 FeedbackfromNon-UniversityStaff

5.3.1Profileofrespondents

Atotalof18responseswerereceivedfromnon-universitystaff.Responses

weretypicallyfrommembersorstaffofarangeofcommunitygroupsand

organisations.Responseswerereceivedfromthoseinvolvedinanumberof

theprojects,includingInspiringLeaders,CulturalSeedAwards,Manchester

ScienceFestivalCommunityAwards,andPublicEngagementFellowships.


48/83


44

5.3.2Benefitsfromparticipation

Communitygroupstaff/memberswereaskedspecifythenatureofany

learningbenefitsgainedfromparticipatingintheprojects.Figure5.7setsoutresponses.

Figure5.7:Learningbenefits

N=18,17,17,18

Overall,communitygroupstaff/memberswerehighlypositiveaboutthe

impactoftheirinvolvement.

Themajorityofrespondentsagreedwitheachstatementandreported

increasedknowledge,skills,awarenessofrelevantissues,andimproved

qualityofwork.Otherbenefitsreportedincludehavinglearnedmoreabout

partnershipworkinganddevelopingnewcontacts.

Asmallnumberreporteddisagreement-thehighestreportedlevelof

disagreementwasinrelationtoqualityofworkhadimproved(17%).

Communitygroupstaff/membersalsoreportedawiderangeofother

benefitsfromtheirinvolvementinprojects.Themainbenefitscitedinclude

thedevelopmentofnewrelationshipsandcontacts(94%)andthatthe

experiencewasfunandbroughtenjoyment(83%).Thesamebenefitswere

reportedearlierbystaff.Figure5.8setsoutresponses.


49/83


45

Itisalsopositivethatcommunitygroupstaff/membersreportedagrowing

interestinnewactivitiesfollowinginvolvementintheprojects(61%).

Figure5.8:Personalbenefitsgainedfromparticipation

N=18

Communitygroupstaff/membersreportedavarietyofunanticipated

benefitsarisingfromtheirinvolvement,including:

itfosteredpartnershipworkingbetweenorganisationsthathavenot

collaboratedtogetherpriortotheBeacon;

itopenedchannelsforcommunicationbetweendifferentpartners;

positivelinkswerecreatedwithuniversities(goodsupportandfeedback);

madenewcontactswithinthevoluntarysector;and

ithelpedtogeneratenewideastobetakenforward.


50/83


46

5.3.3Negativeeffects

Aswithuniversitystaff,communitygroupstaff/membersratedinvolvement

positivelyoverall.Veryfewcommentswereprovidedaroundnegativeeffectsresultingfromparticipatinginprojects,theseincluded:

challengesinreachingparticulartargetgroupswithinthecommunity

(1);and

delaysfromuniversitystaffrespondingtoemail/telephone

correspondence(1).

5.3.4Futureaction

Allrespondentshadalreadyorplannedtogetinvolvedinotherprojects,and

themajorityhadorplannedtoaccessservices/facilitiesofthe

university/culturalorganisationanduseskillsgainedfrominitialinvolvement

(93%and86%respectively).Figure5.9setsoutresponses.

Engagingasarepresentativeonaforumorcommitteeofthe

university/culturalorganisationwastypicallyviewedasalonger-term

outcomeofparticipation.Almosthalfwerenotsurewhethertheywould

engageinthisway(47%).

Figure5.9:Futureactiontakenorplanned


51/83


47

N=15,14,14,15

5.3.5Improvingperceptions,accessibilityandwiderchanges

Asabove,communitygroupstaff/memberswereinthemainpositiveabout

changesinperceptions,etc.resultingfromthesupportedprojects.Figure

5.10setsoutresponses.

Figure5.10:Improvingperceptions

N=18,17,16,15,16,14,15

Communitygroupstaff/memberswerepositivethattheuniversities/cultural

organisationshadabetterunderstandingofthelocalcommunity(andvice

versa)-76%and83%respectively.Respondentsalsoreportedanincreased

awarenessofservices/facilitiesaswellasaninterestinfindingoutmore

abouttheuniversities/culturalorganisations.

Communitygroupstaff/membersweremorelikelytodisagreewithorwere

notsureaboutaccessingfacilities/servicesforthefirsttimeasaresultof

theirinvolvement(60%),whetherpoliciesofuniversities/cultural


52/83


48

organisationstowardspublicengagementhadchanged(57%),orwhether

accessibilityhadimproved(31%).Itmightbethatthatthereisaneedfor

furthercommunicationactivitytoinformcommunitiesaboutrecentchanges

anddevelopmentsinthisarea.

Communitygroupstaff/memberswerealsoaskedtospecifywiderchanges

resultingfromtheprojects.Figure5.11setsoutresponses.

Figure5.11:Resultingchangesarisingfromprojects

N=16,14,16,16,14,15

Similartouniversitystaff,respondentswerepositiveabouttheextentto

whichconnectionsandtherelationshipbetweenuniversities/cultural

organisationsandthelocalcommunityhadimproved-69%and63%of

communitygroupstaff/membersreportedthattherehadbeenapositive

shiftrespectively(tosomeextent/verymuch).Ahighproportionhadalso

participatedinresearchactivitiesandknowledgeexchangewiththe

university/culturalorganisation(64%).

Whileshowingsignsofprogress,communitygroupstaff/memberswere

morelikelytodisagreeornotknowwhethermorecommunitymembers


53/83


49

wererepresentedondecisionmakingbodiesorcommitteesofthe

university/culturalorganisationasaresultoftheprojects(73%)orwhether

therewasanincreasedparticipationinjointforumstoimprovedialogue

(64%).

5.3.6Supportingfutureengagementactivity

Communitygroupstaff/membersprovidedarangeofrecommendationsfor

decision-makerswithinuniversities/culturalorganisationstofosterfurther

engagementactivitywithlocalcommunities.

Somesuggestionsincluded:

supportedactivityshouldnotbeone-off-thereisariskthatitcouldbeviewedastokenisticorforced.Thereisaneedtomaintainand

enhancedialoguewithlocalcommunities;

strongerflowofcommunication,information,sharingresearch

findings,etc.-inparticularinrelationtofollow-up,nextsteps,

reportingbacktocommunitiestoensurethatawarenessisraised;

increasedpromotion-e.g.jointmeetings,website,forum,etc.to

ensurethatdialogueismaintainedanddeveloped;

universityspacesneedtobemademoreaccessibleandwelcoming(canbeadauntingenvironment);and

greatersharingofuniversityknowledgeandexpertisewith

communities.

5.4 Importantvaluesinpublicengagement

Thosethatrespondedtotheonlinesurveywereaskedforviewsonthefive

mostimportantvaluesinengagingwithlocalcommunities.Figure5.12sets

outresponses.

Themostcommonlyreportedvaluescentredonconsultation,openness,

accessibility,andasharedvision.

Thereweresomedifferencesinresponsesbetweenuniversityandnon-

universitystaff.Theformerweremorelikelytoreportvaluessuchasrespect

andopenness.Thiswasfollowedbyhavingasharedvisionandconsultation.

Non-universitystaffweremorelikelytoexpressvaluessuchasaccessibility

(noneoftheuniversitystaffsurveyedidentifiedthisasanimportantvalue),

sensitivityandconsultation.


54/83


50

Figure5.12:Importantvaluesinundertakingpublicengagement

N=19

5.5 NationalSurveyResponses

Thissectionisbasedonareviewofsurveyresponsesprovidedbystaffofthe

threeuniversitiesinvolvedintheManchesterBeaconinJanuary2010aspart

oftheUK-wideevaluationprocessoftheBeaconinitiatives.

Involvementinpublicengagement

Respondentswereaskedabouttheextentoftheirinvolvementinpublic

engagementactivity(Table5.1).


55/83


51

Table5.1:Involvementinpublicengagement

Management Teaching/Research

Total

Includedinjob

description

62 39% 33 17% 95 27%

Anappraisaltarget 29 18% 39 20% 68 19%

Acriterionforpromotion 8 5% 40 20% 48 13%

Overall,only27%ofstaffreportedthatpublicengagementisincludedin

theirjobdescription-thisishigherformanagementthanteaching/research

staff.

Publicengagementisanappraisaltargetforlessthanafifthofstaff(19%)

andevenlessreporteditasacriterionforpromotion(13%).Agreaterproportionofteaching/researchstaffreportedthiswasthecaseeven

thoughfewerteaching/researchstaffreportedthatpublicengagementwas

includedintheirjobdescription.

Feelsupportedtoundertakepublicengagementactivities

Table5.2showsthatlessthanhalfofstafffeelsupportedtoundertake

publicengagementactivitiesbytheirinstitutionalsystemsandprocedures

(41%).Managementfeelmoresupportedthanteaching/researchstaff.

Table5.2:Supportedtoundertakepublicengagement

Number %

Management 75 47%

Teaching/Research 69 36%

Total 144 41%

Respondentswerethenaskedtoconsideraseriesofstatementsaround

feelingsupportedtoundertakepublicengagementactivities.Table5.3sets

outtheproportionthatagreedagreatdealortosomeextent.


56/83


52

Table5.3:Extentstafffeelsupportedtoundertakepublicengagement

Management Teaching/

Research

Total

Peers/colleaguesinmy

departmentaresupportive

towardsthosewhotakepartin

P.E.activities

124 78% 129 66% 253 71%

Theworkcultureofmy

institutionissupportivetowards

thosetakingpartinP.E.activities

122 77% 126 65% 248 70%

Mylinemanagerisgenerally

supportivetowardsthosewhotakepartinP.E.activities

116 73% 137 70% 253 71%

SeniorManagement,including

DeansandViceChancellorsare

generallysupportive

101 64% 109 56% 210 59%

TheinstitutionIworkforrewards

thosewhotakepartinPE

activities

32 20% 37 19% 69 19%

Inthemain,stafffeelsupportedbytheirpeers/colleaguesandlinemanagers

totakepartinpublicengagementactivities(both71%)andfeelthatthe

cultureoftheirinstitutionissupportive(70%).

However,stafffeelthatseniormanagementissupportivetoalesserextent

(59%)andsignificantlyfewerreportthattheyarerewardedfortakingpartin

PE(19%).

Acrossallofthestatements,managementfeelmoresupportedthan

teaching/researchstaff.

Barrierstopublicengagement

Overtwo-thirdsofacademicsreportedthattherearebarrierstobecoming

moreinvolvedinpublicengagementactivities(70%)(Table5.4).


57/83


53

Table5.4:Anybarrierstobecominginvolvedinpublicengagement

Number %Yes 131 70%No 37 20%

Dontknow 18 10%

Total 186 100%

Themainbarriertoparticipatinginpublicengagementactivitywasaneed

formoretimetospendonteaching/research(58%).Thiswasfollowedbya

needtospendmoretimeonadministrationorthattheywouldhavetodoit

intheirowntime(both30%).Table5.5setsoutresponses.

Table5.5:Barrierstopublicengagement

Number %Ineedtospendmoretimeonmyresearch/teaching 107 58%

Ineedtospendmoretimeonadministration 56 30%

Iwouldhavetodoitinmyowntime 56 30%

Thereisnotenoughfunding 42 23%

Lackofopportunity 39 21%

Iamalreadyinvolvedenough 38 20%

Thereislittleseniorlevelsupport 30 16%

Iwouldgetnorecognition 26 14%

Idontknowhowto 18 10%

Therewouldbelittlebenefitforme 17 9%

Iamtoojunior 11 6%

Idonothavethetraining 10 5%

Idonthavetheconfidence 7 4%

Contentiousnatureofmyresearch 4 2%

Englishisnotmyfirstlanguage 4 2%

IfeelIamencroachingontheworkofthePress

OfficeorExternalRelationsstaff

4 2%

Ijustdontwantto 2 1%

Iwouldbebadatit 1 1%

IamonlyintheUKforalimitedperiod 0 0%

Peerpressure 0 0%

ThefollowingquestionswereaddedtotheOakleighsurveybythe

ManchesterBeacon.


58/83


54

ImpactoftheBeaconsforPublicEngagementInitiative

StaffwereaskedtoconsidertheextenttowhichtheBeaconsforPublic

Engagementinitiativehadanimpactontheirownworkprioritiesandthoseoftheirpeers.Table5.6setsouttheproportionofstaffthatreportedan

impact(agreatdealortosomeextent).

Table5.6:PerceivedimpactoftheBeaconsinitiativeonpriorities

Management Teaching/

Research

Total

Increasedpublicengagementas

apriorityforme

44 28% 48 24% 92 26%

Increasedpublicengagementas

apriorityformypeers

51 32% 51 26% 102 29%

JustoveraquarterofstafffeelthattheBeaconsinitiativehasincreased

publicengagementasapriorityforthemselves(26%)andslightlymorefeel

thatithasfortheirpeers(29%).Managementwereslightlymorelikelythan

teaching/researchstafftoreportthatpublicengagementhadincreasedasa

priority.

Hastheinstitutionsengagementwiththecommunityincreased

Staffconsideredtheextenttowhichtheirinstitutionhadincreasedthelevel

ofengagementwithlocalcommunitiesoverthelasttwoyearsi.e.sincethe

startoftheBeaconsinitiative.Table5.7setsouttheproportionthat

reportedthatengagementhadincreased(agreatdealortosomeextent).

Table5.7:Levelofengagementbyinstitutionhasincreased

Management Teaching/Research

Total

Fortheinstitution 108 68% 123 62% 231 65%

Foryourdepartment/faculty 78 49% 99 50% 177 50%

Overall,almosttwo-thirdsagreedthattheirinstitutionslevelofengagement

withcommunitieshadincreased,whilstlessreportedthattheirown

department/facultyhadincreasedengagementoverthesameperiod(50%).

HaspartnershipworkingwithotherinstitutionsinManchesterincreased

LessthanathirdofstafffeelthatpartnershipworkingwithotherHigher

EducationInstitutions(HEIs)hasincreased(agreatdeal/tosomeextent)

overthelasttwoyears:


59/83


55

management-55responses,35%;

teaching/research-54responses,27%;and

total-109responses,31%.


60/83


56

Catalyst-DevelopmentAwards

TheUniversityofManchesterDevelopmentAwardsranfromMaytoNovember2009andinvolvedvariousschools/facultieswithinUoM,otherBeaconpartners,community

organisationsandprimaryschools.Itsoughttoaddressidentifiedinstitutionalculture

changepriorities.Ninedevelopmentawardsthattotalled7,500weremadetosupportthe

long-termgoalofvaluingpublicengagementaspartofeverydayuniversitylife.

Theprojectsincluded:

Buildingdialoguewithlocalcommunitiestodevelopcollaborativehealthhistories;

DevelopmentofaDermatologicalSciences/SchoolofTranslationalMedicinepublic

engagementpolicythroughengagementofSouthAsiancommunitiestobetterunderstand

informationrequirements;PrimaryScienceCollaborationexploredthedevelopmentofa

cross-BeaconHEIpartnershipbasedon

manchester beacon interim review - august 2010

Documents