Monitoring and evaluating the strategy
The consultation paper explains that the Scottish Government wants to establish a Measuring Change Group consisting of key analytical stakeholders, research experts and academics that will be responsible for providing advice on the development of an appropriate approach to monitoring and evaluation of the Culture Strategy. The intention to learn from what works well and to avoid reducing impact evaluation to simplistic target and output indicators is emphasised.
Question 15: What is your view of the proposed approach to monitoring and evaluating the strategy set out in section 5?
Question 16: If you have further comments on the proposed monitoring and evaluation approach, please provide them below.
Table 6: Question 15 - What is your view of the proposed approach to monitoring and evaluating the strategy set out in section 5?
|Support||Do not support||Don’t know||Not answered||Total|
|Academics, University, Higher Education or Further Education||6||6|
|Culture (arts, cultural heritage, creative industries) organisation, group or company||24||3||13||6||46|
|Local Authority or Culture Trust||8||4||4||16|
|National Collections and Performing Companies||4||5||9|
|Representative or umbrella group||15||7||12||34|
|Union or political party||2||2||2||6|
|% of organisations answering||63%||6%||30%|
|Individual (on behalf of a community)||1||1|
|% of individuals answering||59%||13%||28%|
|% of all respondents||51%||7%||25%||17%|
|% of all those answering||62%||8%||30%|
* If figures do not sum to 100% this is due to rounding.
A majority of respondents - 62% of those answering the question - supported the proposed approach to monitoring and evaluating the draft strategy, while 8% did not support the approach and 30% said they did not know. The views of those who did not support the approach and who left a comment are noted at the end of the analysis below. First, the views of those who supported the approach, those who did not know and those who did not answer are considered together, since in practice there was much overlap.
Respondents sometimes suggested they were unable to judge the proposed approach without further detail. However, the intention to monitor was often welcomed or acknowledged to be necessary, with the proposed approach described as interesting, positive, and pragmatic.
Several respondents welcomed the inclusion of the Academic Roundtable as part of the Measuring Change Group or suggested that it will be important to know who the academic members will be. Others noted that they would be interested in knowing who other group members would be or observed that membership should reflect the diversity of the culture sector.
The importance of stakeholder involvement was noted by several respondents and the intent to work collaboratively with key partners was welcomed. In particular, it was suggested that communities and grassroots organisations should be involved.
Respondents who on the proposed approach, most frequently welcomed the commitment to ‘avoid reducing impact evaluation to simplistic target and output indicators’, sometimes still expressed concern that monitoring will become a set of targets and a tick box exercise. There was also support for the focus on ‘longer-term change rather than immediate impacts’.
It was seen as important to keep monitoring simple and thus avoid any additional burden or costs on either delivery bodies or smaller organisations. The need for investment in data collection was suggested, along with ensuring that any new approaches align with those already used by the sector.
Email: Donna Stewart