1. Ian Clark – Director Evaluation, Outcome Agreements and Regeneration. Are the Lessons Being Applied?

2. Personal Perspective National programme evaluations & reviews Outcome Agreement support programmes Local programme & project evaluations Other relevant studies e.g. Outcome Agreements How to Guide and Review of Evidence in ROAs

3. Issues Outcome Agreements have been used to move regeneration issues from the periphery towards the centre of local policy making and service delivery –Formerly, stand alone regeneration programmes –Now, more strategic commitments from partners Evaluation has played a part in this process But how much of the lessons learnt has been applied and how much hasn’t?

4. Outcome Agreements - LOAs ‘Developing Local Outcome Agreements for the Better Neighbourhood Services Fund’ 2004 All Pathfinders & the Executive supported LOAs Advantages: –Local ownership –Focused –Evidence based –Flexible –Bring clarity and accountability –Encourage real partnerships Wider use advocated by Pathfinders

5. Outcome Agreements - LOAs Some of the problems with LOAs: –Guidance –tight timeframe –incorporating diverse views –choice of indicators –programme-level monitoring - diverse issues & 300+ outcomes –focussed programmes more measurable –capturing capital expenditure difficult –rural application Recommendations –menu of indicators –avoid proliferation of Outcome Agreements Learning process

6. Outcome Agreements – ROAs More comprehensive than LOAs Input and commitment from wider range of partners Guidance Menu of indicators included but nearly 1,000 indicators Reality of measuring impact is very difficult Excessive output information Performance Management Framework No final evaluation framework Were ROAs only concerned with CRF funding? ASBOA not well integrated

7. ‘Approaches to Evaluation in Community Regeneration’ Highlighted SIP/BNSF lesson: need for ‘simpler, more focused and more centralised approach’ to evaluation Key findings: –strong central leadership with guidance on locally commissioned evaluations for consistency –guidance on identifying baseline, input and outcome indicators –framework for evaluation and format for reporting –project management reporting systems informs (not replicates) programme evaluation –Timely feedback to local stakeholders to inform developments –Local flexibility within a structure of central support and co- ordination

8. The Role of Local Evaluations What influence do local evaluations have? CPPs stated that SIP/BNSF evaluations did influence their ROA But to what degree: –Overlapping timescales –how widely is the evaluation circulated & read –other factors in retaining projects

9. Current Regeneration Policy ‘People & Place’ integrated approach Clearly, outcome based Fairer Scotland Fund Lighter touch SOAs –National Performance Framework –Guidance –Tied to funding streams –Local authorities initially, CPPs by Apr 2009 –Seen as a developmental process

10. Some final thoughts Changes in FSF compared to CRF Are SOAs just about the Fairer Scotland Fund? Will regeneration initiatives survive beyond ring fenced funding? Is there a consensus on the role of community engagement? Are SOAs manageable?