Strategic Development Project

A three year project for organisational and policy development as part of the Countryside Agency's Rural Social Exclusion programme.

Evaluation Report 1st Jan 2000 – 31st Dec 2002

Background:

The Countryside Agency announced a Rural Social Exclusion (RSE) programme in mid-1999 to:

• improve understanding of RSE
• increase awareness of RSE
• develop mechanisms to counter RSE
• develop actions to counter RSE
• develop and enhance effective partnerships to tackle RSE

The Peak District Rural Deprivation Forum received a grant over three years but tapering in years 2 and 3 for organisational development, particularly to generate earned income for community-led policy and practice development. The work programme was developed through a Business Plan, updated annually.

The Business Plan identified and monitored progress in four areas:

1. Organisational Development and Management
2. Policy Development and Partnership Working
3. Resource base for members and residents
4. Project Management

The final sections of this report are devoted to:

5. What Happened?
6. Lessons Learned

1. Organisational Development and Management:

This area of work covered:

• developing, implementing and monitoring the Forum’s Business Plan,
• regular (bimonthly) Management Committee meetings and interim Honorary Officers meetings,
• reviewing the legal structure for PDRDF and implementing necessary changes (incorporation in September 2001),
• reviewing and updating personnel policies, health and safety policies, risk assessment, etc.,
• support and supervision for all staff members and volunteers involved in carrying out this work programme,
• managing the financial aspects of the Forum’s work,
• reporting upon and monitoring all grants and contracts secured for core or project work,
• reacting to incoming phones/faxes/emails and post not allocated to other areas of the work programme.

2. Policy development and Partnership Working

This area of work covered:

• developing and servicing a working group to support the staff and volunteers,
• participating in local and regional partnerships
• participating in external project steering groups or advisory groups
• inputting into consultation processes at local, regional and national level
• attending conferences and seminars, locally, regionally and nationally, for example,
• developing appropriate policy responses

3. Resource base for members and residents

This area of work covered:

• developing and servicing a working group to enable greater participation by residents, the Focus Group,
• organising regular open meetings and an annual conference,
• purchasing resources and equipment for use by the Forum and members,
• developing the Forum database and membership,
• disseminating information to the membership through IT, newsletters etc

4. Project Management

This area of work covered:

• establishing and servicing working groups of the Forum in response to issues raised by members,
• developing work programmes for the groups,
• developing internal projects that will contribute to PDRDF income,
• Managing projects that contribute management fees to the core PDRDF costs.

The Forum has serviced the following working groups:
• Equal Opportunities Working Group, which has managed a project to:
• Farming Working Group, which has:
• Affordable Housing Working Group, which has:

And managed the following projects:
• Peak District Healthy Living Network
• The Amethyst Project
• Community Enterprise Development Project

It has contracts to deliver projects through:
• Leader + Reaching People
• Local Alchemy

5. What Happened?

The Forum has:
• Developed and introduced a range of new services.
• Engaged with local initiatives to respond to the Foot and Mouth Crisis.
• Enabled public debates and information sessions to inform policy.
• Developed and delivered a range of training opportunities.
• Produced and disseminated 2 findings reports (Amethyst and Tandem Service Delivery) and undertaken primary research towards a further report on hill farming in the Peak District.
• Actively engaged in new, key partnerships.
• Developed a lead role within the Peak District Rural Development Partnership and the High Peak and Derbyshire Dales Local Strategic Partnership.
• Played a proactive part in designing and implementing the Leader + in the Peaks, Dales and Moorlands programme.
• Played a proactive part in developing the infrastructure for the voluntary and community sector in the area.
• Influenced the development of consultation mechanisms within key partnerships.
• Played a proactive part in a local partnership to develop a strategy for community enterprise and securing the resources to implement it.
• Challenged anti-participative practices within key local partnerships and worked to develop alternative, inclusive mechanisms.
• Developed its own organisation, including being more inclusive and responsive to local people.
• Provided voluntary and paid employment opportunities.
• Finalised the incorporation process to provide a secure legal framework for the organisation.
• Relocated its office base and purchased equipment for use by Forum members.
• Developed the resources available to local residents.
• Computerised the financial management and reporting processes, cleaned up and extended the database of contacts.
• Committed to developing best practice through the Investors in People programme.
• Replaced the Strategic Development Grant with management fees from a range of projects and contracts to ensure sustainability for the next 3 years.

6. Lessons Learned:

The lessons to be learned at this stage are:

• The design of the project, that is to deliver the outputs through a series of work programmes for 6/7 working groups, has worked well.
• That a voluntary sector agency, when properly resourced, can take part in programmes and project development on an equitable basis with statutory partners, to the point of being the preferred lead agency in a major local programme.
• Capacity building within local agencies, whether public or voluntary, requires that individual staff pass on their skills and experience to colleagues and partners to reduce dependency upon particular key workers. This is important in the context of partnership working and encouraging open and inclusive structures.
• Within national and regional funding programmes, there may be a need to develop reconciliation or mediation services for project managers and partner organisations where there is a problem of implementation locally.
• At the end of the process, the PDRDF network is wider and involves more people, particularly residents, in its management. This has plugged gaps in knowledge and experience and enriched our work. It has become a key strength of the organisation so was well-worth the investment. Supporting local people in identifying issues and developing projects is effective at bringing forward new ideas but this support can be intensive and time consuming.
• It has been an empowering experience for PDRDF. Taking a very proactive attitude to policy development that is informed by practice and being prepared to develop practice in line with current policy has generated a feeling that we can contribute to the policy-practice cycle and be less vulnerable to prevailing programme criteria.
• The necessary corollary to this is that policy-makers must be prepared to be led by informed practice: the current policy climate is very open to participative policy development. This involves adequate resourcing of voluntary sector infrastructure, to enable participation in partnerships, networks and consultation events, if the benefits of this participation are to be derived.
• During the final year, 50% of the Managing Director’s time was spent on activities to maintain the organisation and fulfil its project management commitments. However, this is mainly due to project funding increasingly contributing to policy and partnership work, which will inevitably reflect back as a higher proportion of core costs on organisational and project management. The overall management of an organisation such as PDRDF and implementation of a Business Plan must be allocated sufficient resources that reflect the actual time spent on this area. It must include an allocation for “dead-time” responding to queries etc. This must be reflected in management fees charged out and in charges for services provided.
• It has taken the full 3 years for PDRDF to achieve the organisational capacity to generate a sufficient independent income to maintain its core function - to raise awareness and initiate new projects to address rural social exclusion.
• PDRDF was a robust organisation prior to the grant in terms of the coherence of its active membership and a track record of working together over 7 years. These relationships and this trust within the PDRDF have enabled it to survive a series of challenges which a newer and less robust organisation may have succumbed to.

Full copies of this report are available on request.

Denise Servante,
Project Manager.