Agenda item - LGF Mid-term Evaluation

Agenda item

LGF Mid-term Evaluation

Minutes:

A report was submitted which presented the findings from the Mid-Term Evaluation.  There was a requirement of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy for LEPs to undertake an impact evaluation of the 2015-21 LGF Programme.  The impact evaluation of the SCR LGF programme would be delivered in two parts i.e. a Mid-Term Evaluation and an Ex-Post Evaluation.  It was not intended to commence the Ex-Post Evaluation until 2022, to enable a significant amount of time to be spent with the Board Members to understand some of the issues raised by the Mid-Term Evaluation and analysis.  This would enable the development of what was required within the Ex-Post Evaluation and how to test the benefits that the region had accrued as a result of the £367m investment. 

 

Following today’s meeting, work would commence to drill down into the messages within the report by theme for the thematic boards as the new investment priorities were developed.

 

The following key findings were identified from the report:-

 

·           Approximately 6 years ago, the Local Growth Fund had invited all LEPs to competitively bid for a share of £12bn, which had followed the work across the country for the development of the Strategic Economic Plans.  The 2014-2020 Strategic Economic Plan had been the basis for the submission of the SCR bid.

·           A total of £363.7m had been awarded to the LEP for three Growth Deals, which included £42m for a retained major transport scheme in Rotherham.

·           It was anticipated that £48.8m of match funding would be generated for Housing Intervention Fund Projects by 2025.

·           Members noted the economic benefits achieved to date as a result of the investment, together with the economic benefits forecast to be achieved by 2025.

·           Members were referred to the suite of outputs that would be delivered, which would be monitored and reported to the Government.

 

J Muir commented that whilst he applauded the way in which the matters were reviewed on a custom job basis, he considered that this raised issues where matters were reviewed one dimensionally.  He encouraged the impact on lost productively to be considered, as this was a key argument that could be supported from a business perspective.

 

Dr Adams stated that such issues would be built into the greater analysis as the data was reviewed within the report, and as the final evaluation and benefits were scoped out.

 

P Kennan referred to the context of the report in relation to the lessons learnt and what could be taken forwards into the future projects.  He referred to the summary conclusions section of the report, in particular the capacity, financial ability of the private sector to develop business cases, the need for regular workshops to educate people in terms of the new funding programmes, and the ability to celebrate and raise awareness of what had been achieved.  He queried whether these issues could be captured by the LEP.

 

In response, J Muir commented that this was an evolving model which required a great deal of emphasis in order to understand how it should be measured in the future.  He suggested that there was a distillation of the learning within the relevant areas of the thematic boards to consult with the Co-Chairs to determine how they wished to evaluate within their thematic area in the future.  He expressed his thanks to Dr Adams for summarising the report.

 

RESOLVED – That the Board:-

 

i)        Noted the findings of the Mid-Term Evaluation report.

 

Considered the costed methodology for the Ex-Post Evaluation.

Supporting documents: