Leadership and funding

8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 At the outset, the evaluation team was commissioned to identify existing monitoring and evaluation activities already in place and on the basis of the intelligence gathered, evaluate the leadership, funding and impacts of the Programme on the cultural and wider sectors. The evaluation team was also required to develop an outline monitoring and evaluation framework informed by the experiences of assessing impact for London 2012 and produce 5 case study exemplars of London 2012 activity in Scotland. In this chapter, the main conclusions are presented, followed by recommendations for Glasgow 2014.

Leadership and funding

8.2 Although some limitations were identified by restricting opportunities predominantly to the Managed Funds process, this approach to structuring the Programme enabled Creative Scotland to curate it effectively and give it coherence within a complex and multi-faceted cultural offer for London 2012.

8.3

8.4

8.5 There was universal agreement amongst projects and strategic partners that the Creative Programmer role was a real strength and resource for Creative Scotland and the Programme; in articulating the vision of the Programme; providing a single point of contact within Creative Scotland; and successfully managing difficult partnership arrangements.

Relationships between strategic stakeholders were deepened as a result of the intense nature of the working relationships formed before and during the London 2012 Olympics. Creative Scotland’s relationship with LOCOG was strong, particularly with the London 2012 Festival Director where a shared vision provided the opportunity for a significant number of ambitious Scottish projects to be funded and become part of the London 2012 Festival.

Creative Scotland and officers with responsibility for London 2012 activity, benefitted from the learning accrued as a result of involvement in the range of London 2012 programmes. The demands placed upon Creative Scotland staff and other strategic partners in Scotland to ensure the successful delivery of the Programme produced a skills legacy that should be exploited for the Glasgow 2014 Cultural Programme.

8.6 Creative Scotland’s strategic funding of £5million, along with significant partnership funding (circa £9million) provided a catalyst for greater collaborative working and synergistic activity within and beyond Scotland as part of the Programme. For example, Festivals Edinburgh worked closely with LOCOG and tourism agencies to ensure the promotional opportunities emanating from London 2012 were exploited.

8.7

8.8 Creative Scotland’s funding in programmes, projects and organisations involved in the Programme meant that it often played a role in enabling or promoting project activity rather than investing in it directly. However, this approach created some problems in apportioning impact. Where no financial support is provided for projects, agreement on access to data for evaluation purposes should be secured at the earliest opportunity.

The promotional value for projects from their involvement in the Programme was apparent. This study has provided evidence that Scottish projects felt that being part of the Cultural Olympiad celebrations brought greater national profile, a sense of being part of a wider national celebration and enabled greater ambition and scope for projects.