I think this is because all of the elements need to be properly addressed to increase chances of success. Resources (adequate funding and effort), time frames (especially starting early enough), involving the right people and also being aware of the local situation. Its a bit like making a cake - unless you have all the ingredients and make it properly, you risk it being a flop! You can be a bit flexible, but you still need enough of the key ingredients to achieve something edible.
You are quite right Tash - sorry - that wasn't clear (it feels so long ago, yet the legacy remains!). There were 10 proposed hpMCZ sites, from which it was intended to whittle down to 3 or 4 across Wales to designate. The example was intended to show both that unless you get engagement right first time you may end up having to abandon (as in this case) and also that actually in Wales we have no hpMCZs at all even now.
How do you keep engagement going beyond the life of a project? Communities may put in a lot of effort for a project, how do you show that their hard work hasn't been for nothing?
Easier said than done, but planning in the 'legacy' or future sustainability of any work is helpful; for example by setting up a 'Community Steering Group' to manage a project, or to take action further at the end of a funding period (Often with paid staff supporting/ organising). This is not always possible, and sometimes it really does require a paid coordinator, to keep things going. Looking for legacy funding/ follow up/ expansion/ diversification can help. Or sometimes you can build these relationships and working with communities into other people's 'day job'?
It may sound really obvious but we find that working with the people who 'live' the situation you are working in works best. So ask them.. Trying to reach fishers - speak to them (and often you may find you need to go meet them at the docks for example); speaking with local authorities - it may even be as simple as using a system (down to teleconference system right now!) or time that works.. There are often local newsletters/ facebook groups etc you can reach people through. And you may need different levels of information, pitched at different audiences. Often the 'funder pitch' is not what local communities want to hear most, and an FAQ on how a project effects them is..
This came up in a regional session yesterday - often when seeking collaboration we attract the "usual suspects" but a wider group may be needed to achieve an outcome. How do you go about identifying and attracting "not-the-usual suspects"?
I would say spread your net wide and be careful/adaptable/targeted (as appropriate - use multiple means) with your communications in order to entice input. Make use of social media as that can have a broad reach. But also utilise local networks and contacts that can widely advertise for you (local papers, posters in the community...).
@sue.burton indeed Sue, I'd add events already happening (when they can again!) like strawberry teas/ fayre's/community days and also don't be afraid to speak to 'other sectors'. Sometimes someone from an unexpected corner can bring a solution..
Great point Nia - how do we keep great projects and engagement going, both in terms of a) current funding coming to an end and trying to keep continuity b) with the new ways of engaging we may have to adopt through the covid restrictions?
AS we answered live, we feel there is a real need to recognise 'what works' and perhaps what is prevented because xyz exists? Then you can build 'innovation' or new streams of projects on top of these existing systems. They still need resourcing though..
Does the panel feel that the funding structure for projects is a help or a hindrance to progressing with work? Should we be pushing for more consistent funding from WG/NRW/Elsewhere?
It is obviously necessary (so a help) but so often a hindrance due to inflexibility or restriction from the offset. Yes to more consistent funding, especially for 'core' work from which existing successful work can continue and new effective solutions flow. Consistency is impeded by the current 'start/stop' nature of 'project/innovative' funding. We all I think realise that funding from NRW/WG is unlikely to fulfil what is needed (although it would help enormously!). Getting private funding, like that accessed through Sea Changers and The Blue Impact Fund, will be the future I think. Who else has the money?! Waiting to see what will fill the EU funding gap. Governments won't have the budget, but they can critically support the framework needed to deliver work.
Thanks Natasha, stop starting funding (or gaps in between) for things that clearly 'work' is incredibly frustrating and a waste of valuable resources, especially if skilled project officers have to leave as a result. As I mentioned before, a lot of the good systems 'that work' out there don't receive core funding, and/or need to constantly show innovation which can be challenging. Longer term funding is something we have spoken about in funding workshops for a long time, but is hard to achieve beyond political 'terms'. A mix of private/ foundation funding with public sector would be great, but some elements are 'more attractive' to fund (i,e shiny projects or those with practical outcomes) which would not help those 'behind the scenes systems/ baseline projects' that are so vital to i.e. reach a wide number of stakeholders.
Croeso i
Ffurflen Gofrestru’r Digwyddiad Ar-lein
"Ein harfordir a'n moroedd: Rhoi syniadau ar waith"
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Jenny Carmichael:
What would you like to see major funders making allowances for to ease the problem of achieving true collaboration in projects?
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Kathryn Hughes:
Whilst we know ‘how’ engagement and collaboration ‘should’ happen, why is it that we often see examples where it hasn’t worked well?
I think this is because all of the elements need to be properly addressed to increase chances of success. Resources (adequate funding and effort), time frames (especially starting early enough), involving the right people and also being aware of the local situation. Its a bit like making a cake - unless you have all the ingredients and make it properly, you risk it being a flop! You can be a bit flexible, but you still need enough of the key ingredients to achieve something edible.
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Natasha Lough:
Fact checker :)and maybe a lesson in communication, but WG never proposed to have 10 HPMCZs. The aim was to have 3 or 4 small sites
You are quite right Tash - sorry - that wasn't clear (it feels so long ago, yet the legacy remains!). There were 10 proposed hpMCZ sites, from which it was intended to whittle down to 3 or 4 across Wales to designate. The example was intended to show both that unless you get engagement right first time you may end up having to abandon (as in this case) and also that actually in Wales we have no hpMCZs at all even now.
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Harriet Robinson:
How do you keep engagement going beyond the life of a project? Communities may put in a lot of effort for a project, how do you show that their hard work hasn't been for nothing?
Easier said than done, but planning in the 'legacy' or future sustainability of any work is helpful; for example by setting up a 'Community Steering Group' to manage a project, or to take action further at the end of a funding period (Often with paid staff supporting/ organising). This is not always possible, and sometimes it really does require a paid coordinator, to keep things going. Looking for legacy funding/ follow up/ expansion/ diversification can help. Or sometimes you can build these relationships and working with communities into other people's 'day job'?
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Harriet Robinson:
How do you know how to pitch the level of info correctly?
It may sound really obvious but we find that working with the people who 'live' the situation you are working in works best. So ask them.. Trying to reach fishers - speak to them (and often you may find you need to go meet them at the docks for example); speaking with local authorities - it may even be as simple as using a system (down to teleconference system right now!) or time that works.. There are often local newsletters/ facebook groups etc you can reach people through. And you may need different levels of information, pitched at different audiences. Often the 'funder pitch' is not what local communities want to hear most, and an FAQ on how a project effects them is..
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Kath Wellard:
unlikely partners? How would you go about identifying unlikely partners? We're all guilty of asking 'the usual suspects'...
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Amy Martin:
This came up in a regional session yesterday - often when seeking collaboration we attract the "usual suspects" but a wider group may be needed to achieve an outcome. How do you go about identifying and attracting "not-the-usual suspects"?
I would say spread your net wide and be careful/adaptable/targeted (as appropriate - use multiple means) with your communications in order to entice input. Make use of social media as that can have a broad reach. But also utilise local networks and contacts that can widely advertise for you (local papers, posters in the community...).
@sue.burton indeed Sue, I'd add events already happening (when they can again!) like strawberry teas/ fayre's/community days and also don't be afraid to speak to 'other sectors'. Sometimes someone from an unexpected corner can bring a solution..
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Harriet Robinson:
Great point Nia - how do we keep great projects and engagement going, both in terms of a) current funding coming to an end and trying to keep continuity b) with the new ways of engaging we may have to adopt through the covid restrictions?
AS we answered live, we feel there is a real need to recognise 'what works' and perhaps what is prevented because xyz exists? Then you can build 'innovation' or new streams of projects on top of these existing systems. They still need resourcing though..
QUESTION SUBMITTED LIVE:
Natasha Lough:
Does the panel feel that the funding structure for projects is a help or a hindrance to progressing with work? Should we be pushing for more consistent funding from WG/NRW/Elsewhere?
It is obviously necessary (so a help) but so often a hindrance due to inflexibility or restriction from the offset. Yes to more consistent funding, especially for 'core' work from which existing successful work can continue and new effective solutions flow. Consistency is impeded by the current 'start/stop' nature of 'project/innovative' funding. We all I think realise that funding from NRW/WG is unlikely to fulfil what is needed (although it would help enormously!). Getting private funding, like that accessed through Sea Changers and The Blue Impact Fund, will be the future I think. Who else has the money?! Waiting to see what will fill the EU funding gap. Governments won't have the budget, but they can critically support the framework needed to deliver work.
Thanks Natasha, stop starting funding (or gaps in between) for things that clearly 'work' is incredibly frustrating and a waste of valuable resources, especially if skilled project officers have to leave as a result. As I mentioned before, a lot of the good systems 'that work' out there don't receive core funding, and/or need to constantly show innovation which can be challenging. Longer term funding is something we have spoken about in funding workshops for a long time, but is hard to achieve beyond political 'terms'. A mix of private/ foundation funding with public sector would be great, but some elements are 'more attractive' to fund (i,e shiny projects or those with practical outcomes) which would not help those 'behind the scenes systems/ baseline projects' that are so vital to i.e. reach a wide number of stakeholders.