Programme Evaluation 2014-15

Recommendations

Info

5. F4C’s Beneficiaries “The negligence of the environment, which has brought great harm to the human community, resulted from our ignorance of the very special importance of the environment. We must now help and teach people to understand the need for environmental protection. We must teach them that conservation directly aids our survival.” His Holiness the 14 th Dalai Lama of Tibet F4C’s Direct Beneficiaries Table 4 Numbers of Direct Beneficiaries per Activity Area Activity Direct Beneficiaries Chargeable Services 46 Wirral VCA - Faith Network 208 Mersey Forest – Local Sustainable Transport Fund Engagement +580 Target Wellbeing - Better Lives +300 Individual Schools 2014-15 254 MRWA Veolia – School Waste Action Programme (SWAP) +1,500 MRWA Veolia – Eco Parents Educrate +1,200 Environment Agency - Flood Risk Awareness in Diverse Communities +5,700 Eleanor Rathbone CT - Make Taste and Takeaway 91 Merseyside Textile Forum – Sew Far Sew Good 68 One Ark Guerrilla Gardening 30 Total (Est’d) 9,895 + Best estimate Not all funded projects include performance indicators specifying beneficiary numbers. Some activities, such as presentations to school assemblies, environmental clean-ups, outreach sessions to church and mosque communities and celebrations, involve large gatherings of people: it is not viable or appropriate to take a precise head count in such circumstances. Where it has not been possible to provide an exact figure, F4C workers have provided a realistic best estimate, based – for example – on school rolls. The cumulative estimate of around 9,900 beneficiaries for these 11 activities represents a 55% increase over the corresponding figure of 6,400- for a total of 15 activity areas - in 2013-14. Over 54% of beneficiaries were supported through a single project – the Environment Agency (EA) - funded Flood Risk Awareness in Diverse Communities. This involved extensive community work with the Lancashire and local Councils of Mosques in Greater Manchester; women’s groups, such as the Asian Development Association of Bury (ADAB); and secular environmental organisations such as the Rochdale Environmental Action Group (REAG). It built on EA-funded work undertaken in 2013-14 in Rochdale, Bury and Bolton, extending this activity into Oldham. Many of these areas are at risk of flooding from rivers or canals 8 . The project centred on raising awareness of the risk within pre-engaged communities, and empowering members of those communities – mainly Muslims and Hindus - to communicate this in a manner consistent with their religious beliefs and teachings. In particular, it developed practical approaches to reducing fly-tipping in waterways by showing how it exerts a negative environmental impact and increases flood risk. A key 8 For example, EA data cited in a Manchester Evening News article of 31.12.2015, published at a time of severe flooding across the conurbation, indicates that over 15,000 properties across Greater Manchester are at medium or high risk of flooding. 27% of properties in the OL14 postcode area of Oldham are considered to be in the high risk category. Available at: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/greatermanchester-postcodes-flood-risk-10670366 11
element of this was to work with faith and community groups to disseminate a knowledge of appropriate waste disposal (particularly bulky items) and recycling. Projects with smaller and more precise numbers of beneficiaries had different objectives and approaches, but no less relevant to delivering F4C’s chartable objectives. They tend to focus on one-on-one support for beneficiaries with specific needs. Many belong to ‘hard to reach and hard to teach’ communities (e.g., asylum seekers, recovering substance users and people in the criminal justice process). In that regard, Make, Taste and Take Away enabled asylum seeker volunteers and unemployed parents and carers to improve their literacy and numeracy skills through the medium of a series of cooking sessions and community lunches. The project was carefully planned, in terms of engagement with the beneficiaries, the ESOL and adult functional skills embedded in the format of the sessions, preparing evaluation tools, undertaking venue risk assessments and designing nutritious, low budget recipes. Sew Far So Good helped BME and other disadvantaged, hard to reach groups to re-use, repair and recycle textiles through a series of practical skill sessions, working closely with the MRWA and member charities within the Merseyside Textile Forum. It also required a large measure of preparation, through identifying opportunities and potential venues; establishing the willingness of volunteers to support project development and delivery; setting up administration, monitoring and recording procedures; developing unstructured interview questions and behavioural change measures; and establishing contact with relevant client groups before even designing the framework of the events themselves. In 2014-15, F4C continued to meet its charitable objectives in terms of beneficiaries’ places of residence, not just the locations of activities. It is almost certain that, allowing for the impractability of taking head-counts at certain events and the need to preserve the anonymity of certain vulnerable clients, the overwhelming majority of F4C’s beneficiaries lived in super output areas of Merseyside and Greater Manchester with high levels of multiple deprivation, as indicated in Map 1. In the context of bringing together faith communities, F4C once again achieved notable success in 2014-15. As previously mentioned, the EA Flood Risk Awareness project was strongly focused around engagement with Muslim communities in Greater Manchester. Other areas of activity, such as Target Wellbeing, Make Taste and Takeaway and Sew Far Sew Good, specifically sought to engage and empower members of vulnerable and isolated BME communities. Although we must nevertheless make the caveat that it was neither possible nor appropriate for F4C to categorise people according to their religious beliefs or traditions, it is clear that well over half of beneficiaries were from a non-Christian faith background. The 2011 Census showed that only around 6% of people in North West England belonged to the largest such groups (Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist) 9 . Even if we adjust these figures to take account of higher concentrations in Merseyside and Greater Manchester, F4C is ‘punching above its weight’ by reaching out to these communities and helping them to work alongside the indigenous population to build a region that is just and sustainable. It is also important to note that F4C plays a key role in continuing the work begun by the Anglican Diocese, Catholic Archdiocese and Free Churches to strengthen the links between Merseyside’s Christian communities and making sectarianism a thing of the past. Of particular note is F4C’s support of the Parish Power initiative, Catholic schools and churches in the St Helens area through workshops to explore and use a range of sensory materials to build designs for outdoor spaces. This resulted in the creation of a Faith Trail, incorporating observation stations, linked to other senses and landscape features. 10 The trail, which also incorporated garden plots at a local Methodist school, two Methodist churches and a community centre, was inaugurated in May 2015 with a series of pilgrimages “celebrating Mary and honouring the women in our lives who do so much for us”. Besides the local Catholic communities, schools and individuals from other Christian traditions came together at Pentecost for a joint celebration. 9 Office for National Statistics (2012) ‘Census Gives Insights into Characteristics of the North West’s Population’ News Release 11.12.2012 Available at: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp29904_291544.pdf 10 Archdiocese of Liverpool (2015) Catholic Pictorial ‘Faith Grows on New Pilgrims’ Trail’ June 2015 pp.4-6 Available at: https://issuu.com/educatemagazine/docs/cathpic_june_2015 12
Page 1 and 2: Programme Evaluation 2014 - 15
Page 3 and 4: Contents “The most important prin
Page 5 and 6: Chart 1: Percentage of Project Area
Page 7 and 8: Running Costs In addition to the co
Page 9 and 10: Although every local authority area
Page 11: 4. Nature and Extent of Partnership
Page 15 and 16: 6. Outputs and Outcomes “A lack o
Page 17 and 18: • 80 asylum seekers supported by
Page 19 and 20: 7. Partners’ Perspectives “True
Page 21 and 22: skills and shared responsibility. P
Page 23 and 24: • F4C has successfully maintained
Page 25: Photo 12: Asylum Link Merseyside la

Programme Evaluation 2014-15

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?