Year 1 Annual Report 2013-2014 Social Return On Investment Evaluation volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk
A Heritage Lottery Fund Project delivered by IWM North and Manchester Museum 2013 - 2016
In partnership with the Museum of Science and Industry, Peopleâ€™s History Museum, National Trust:Dunham Massey, Manchester City Galleries, Ordsall Hall, Manchester Jewish Museum and Whitworth Art Gallery.
IWM North 4
Page Executive Summary
Definition of SROI Terms
About IWMN North and Manchester Museum
1. Evaluation aims and objectives
2. Methodology using SROI in Year 1: A longitudinal study
3. Background to Inspiring Futures (if): Volunteering for Wellbeing
4. Literature and Research: Heritage volunteering and wellbeing
5. SROI stage 1 Identifying scope and stakeholder outcomes
6. SROI stage 2: Provisional Impact map and the Theory of change: Year 1
7. SROI stage 3: Measurement, evidencing outcomes and giving them a value
8. SROI stage 4: Establishing 'impact'
9. SROI stage 5: Calculating provisional social value to date
10. Learning, improvement and on-going evaluation
11. Interim conclusion and recommendations
Appendices 63 Appendix A: Methodological note Appendix B: List of proxy values and underlying estimates Appendix C: Volunteer Survey Forms and Venue Survey Forms Appendix D: Valuing Wellbeing combining NICE, QALYS, National Accounts of Wellbeing Appendix E: Adjustment Accounting for Impact
First Year summary in pictures and numbers 83 Local people recruited
5 training courses
10 heritage venues
4301 hours of training
2201 hours of volunteering
80% in receipt of a benefit
39% increase in wellbeing
17 people into employment
"This has helped increase my confidence and my mental health has been more stable since the course. I no longer panic when people talk to me...I'm more confident to travel alone. My parents think it's the best thing that has happened in my life...it's helped me get a place at University.â€?
Executive Summary Inspiring Futures: Volunteering for wellbeing 2013-2016 (if) is in its first year and is achieving dramatic improvements in participants' state of mental and emotional wellbeing, across a diverse range of abilities and challenging personal circumstances. Further outcomes for many participants are emerging, around continued volunteering, entering further education, employability and gaining work, as well as positive attitudinal change towards opportunities for socialising and project participation in heritage. This project is preventing and breaking vicious cycles of low self-belief, isolation, exclusion, demotivation, depression and rejection for many participants. Inspiring Futures' success is underpinned by: Supporting improvements in wellbeing and positive emotional functioning for individuals Developing strong learning partnerships / collaboration amongst a range of local venues and volunteer co-ordinators Fostering connections to people and the human experience across time, through heritage volunteering
if aims to be a life-changing social learning programme within museums and galleries. It will support 225 participants in the Greater Manchester area (75 per year) into heritage volunteering and learning, and away from social and economic isolation. It is one of the first ever projects of its kind in Manchester. It draws together multiple venues to collectively achieve further improvement, consistency and quality, in volunteering practice as a key route to transforming people's wellbeing. The impact of heritage and cultural environments on individual wellbeing is of great significance - not just by supporting sector specific skills and employability - but also by helping to build mental and emotional capital such as increased confidence, self worth, reflective practice, creativity, aspiration, life satisfaction and stress reduction. “I’m far more outgoing now, I’m more prepared to grab an opportunity more than I would have before, I have a real sense of direction and focus – I’m really excited, for the first time a lot of things are making sense about what path to follow. I will carry on volunteering and take those skills with me where I go next.” Maryam August 2014 Like many of us, participants have found the heritage and gallery environments are simultaneously engaging and reflective spaces. Combined with a learning group dynamic and technical yet creative training content and delivery style, the programme in this setting is clearly having a significant impact. This transformation is noticeable in many participants when comparing their starting points before recruitment, to their placement completion (see Table A). This report describes findings from the evaluation process so far, and is restricted to the first year of outcomes to date. Some outcomes may last beyond a year, and will form the longitudinal element of the evaluation going into Years 2 and 3. The evaluation process is a blended approach, combining Social Return On Investment (SROI), National Accounts of Wellbeing research, and Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) values used by national health bodies. SROI is unique in translating the measurement of social values into economic language, and helps organisations improve decision-making and performance. It has been an important factor for the programme design that Envoy Partnership combine their ability to be both people-focused, approachable and engaging for the integrity of the technical and quantitative aspects of the SROI analysis, as well as supporting the experience of participants. We estimate that solely within year 1, without accounting for future longitudinal benefit periods for stakeholders, the programme has already generated added social and economic value between £278,000£310,000.
Table A. Measureable change in key wellbeing outcomes amongst volunteers, after completing 10 week training plus 6 week placement (Year 1 only, pre-training compared to post-placement scores, calibrated from 5 point Likert scale to a 0-1 scale) Table A compares how participants recorded their levels of wellbeing before training and after completing the course, illustrating a clear and consistent increase in wellbeing outcomes important to this stakeholder group. The largest changes are in self-confidence and life satisfaction, followed by improved sense of belonging and resilience.
Reasons for success going forward
Fostering a sense of connection, enrichment and contribution to and from other people and their stories appears to be a key differentiator of heritage volunteering. Participants develop a strong connectedness to events and human experience across time. Training components unlocking participants' creative and communicative capabilities of storytelling, bringing objects to life and inspiring visitors' imaginations, thus significantly enhancing visitor experience and collection interpretation. The setting of Museums and galleries as both stimulating and reflective spaces: offers a potential pathway to enhanced mental, cognitive and emotional capital. Training components that are experiential and participatory carried out specifically in the museum or gallery environment, (not just classroom-based). Dedicated Volunteer Co-ordinators who are committed to testing and improving good practices and solutions in their venue, and fostering support for wellbeing in the workplace. Developing a community and platform to unlock good recruitment and volunteer coordination practice, knowledge transfer and support - creating a cluster effect.
We have summarised the key drivers so far as to why the project is succeeding and can continue to improve in having such a transformational impact on participant wellbeing: The value generated also benefits partner venues, through gaining further well-trained volunteers and increasing operational capacity for that venue. This has improved access to collections for more visitors, who otherwise would not have the opportunity to interact with the collections on a more meaningful and human level. The experience is likely to have led to visitors making word of mouth recommendations to future visitors. Going forward, the if project will unlock further value if it broadens the range of referrers serving its target groups, for example working together with local social housing providers to reach more vulnerable and isolated residents, thus catalysing tenant and community wellbeing. This can also help to enhance diversity of the local volunteer force to further reflect local communities.
Definition of SROI terms
Attribution – The credit that an organisation or person’s contribution can take, or be given, for generating an outcome Beneficiary – People or organisations that experience positive or negative change (or outcomes) as a result of the activities Benefit Period – The length of time outcomes and impacts last for a stakeholder Deadweight – A measure of the amount an outcome would have happened anyway had the activity not taken place Discounting / Discount rate – The process by which future financial costs and benefits are adjusted into present-day values, to account for the decreasing value of money over time. (Discount rate is the interest rate used to discount future costs and benefits) Displacement – The rate or assessment of how much of the outcomes displaces other outcomes, (usually most pertinent for fiscal outcomes) Drop-off – The deterioration rate at which an outcome would have a reduced impact over time Impact Map – A map or table diagram, that describes and captures how an activity and resources required for it lead to particular outputs and beneficial (or non-beneficial) outcomes and changes for different stakeholders Outcome – The essential final benefits or dis-benefits that result from an activity, mainly defined from the perspective of the stakeholder Proxy value – An approximation or derived value where an exact market-traded measure of value is not possible to obtain SROI – Social Return on Investment Stakeholder – People or organisation(s) that experience negative or positive change as a result of an activity, and have an affect on, or are affected by the activity.
"Before Inspiring Futures, I wasn’t really doing much with my life...I left college in 2012, because I was really sick, ... [at the start of 2013 I was diagnosed with an illness]….. And after that I really wasn't doing anything – I was just sitting at home feeling miserable all the time. And then I discovered Inspiring Futures. I was kind of hoping it would help me get my life back on track. So I was thinking the project would be a good way to get back to at least doing something that I cared about doing... And help me get some of my confidence back.”
About IWM North and Manchester Museum IWM North part of Imperial War Museums and the Manchester Museum have worked in partnership since 2006 when they collaborated on the innovative In Touch volunteering programme. In March 2013, IWM North and Manchester Museum were successful in their application to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) to develop and deliver Inspiring Futures: Volunteering for Wellbeing (if).
IWM North IWM North currently welcomes around 330,000 visitors each year and has established itself as a key cultural player in the North. Essentially a front-end service for Imperial War Museums (IWM), IWM North is not a store or archive in its own right, but draws on the collections, archives and research of IWM as a whole. It is a learning experience where imaginative exhibitions, programmes and projects are combined to promote public understanding of the causes, course and consequence of war and conflict involving the UK and Commonwealth since 1900.
Manchester Museum The Manchester Museum is dedicated to inspiring visitors of all ages to learn about the natural world and human cultures, past and present. Tracing its roots as far back as 1821, the Museum has grown to become one of the UK’s great regional Museums and its largest university Museum. All of the collections in the Museum, which comprise approximately 4 million items, have been formally 'Designated' by Government for their importance nationally and internationally, and cover the disciplines of botany, entomology, geology, palaeontology, zoology, archaeology, Egyptology, ethnography and numismatics (coins and medals), as well as a live collection of amphibians and reptiles.
About Heritage Lottery Fund The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) sustains and transforms a wide range of heritage through innovative investment in projects with a lasting impact on people and places. As the largest dedicated funder of the UK’s heritage, with around £375 million a year to invest in new projects and a considerable body of knowledge, HLF is also a leading advocate for the value of heritage to modern life. From museums, parks and historic places to archaeology, natural environment and cultural traditions, HLF invests in every part of national heritage. Since 1994, HLF has supported over 36,500 projects allocating more than £6 billion across the UK. HLF is administered by the National Heritage Memorial Fund (NHMF) which was given the responsibility of distributing a share of money raised through the National Lottery for Good Causes, to heritage across the UK, in 1994. HLF is a non-departmental public body accountable to Parliament via the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
About Envoy, Our Life & Gaby Porter + Associates Envoy Partnership is an advisor in evidence-based research and evaluation, specialising in measuring and demonstrating the value of social, economic and environmental impacts. Envoy works together with Gaby Porter, a Manchester-based heritage interpretation and activity planning expert, supporting the development of engaging and sustainable heritage around the country; and Our Life, a Manchester-based leader in engagement and empowerment services, whose mission is to improve wellbeing and empower communities.
About Social Return on Investment (SROI) SROI is a form of evaluation that enables a better understanding of an organisation’s impact on people, the economy, and the environment. It helps assess whether a project is good value for money and can help decision makers decide where to invest to maximise their impact. SROI’s development in the UK has been funded by the Cabinet Office and the Scottish Government (through the SROI Project). It is aligned with the principles of HM Treasury Green Book and increasingly used to measure value-for-money and is part of the guidance produced by the National Audit Office.
1. Evaluation Aims and Objectives IWM North and Manchester Museum want to evidence the effectiveness of socially engaged volunteering practices in Manchester's heritage sector for improving wellbeing and combating social and economic isolation. They want to understand the wellbeing benefits to the volunteers who take part, and how the programme shapes their journey and vice versa (pre, during and post participation in the programme). In addition, IWM North and Manchester Museum want to understand the effect on partner venues from creating and participating in a consistent community of venues' best practice, support and knowledge transfer. This evaluation occurs over the three years of the Inspiring Futures: Volunteering for Wellbeing project (if). This document reports on the first year. It continues to build upon previous findings from the highly successful In Touch volunteer programme, which, as part of its evaluation highlighted the potential of heritage volunteering to change people’s lives. The evaluation seeks to find out exactly how the programme contributes to individual socio-economic wellbeing for participants, and to quantify potential savings to the wider economy that may result from these outcomes. Aims/outcomes of the evaluation process:
Support if team with information and feedback to refine relevant aspects of the delivery model where appropriate, and enhance opportunities for maximising wellbeing and responsible volunteering practice Lead and partner organisations, other heritage venues and practitioners to learn from inclusive volunteering and the potential benefits for individuals and organisations Policy makers and funders to be provided with robust evidence to support developing good practice, decision-making and policy The wider sector to gain a consistent outcomes change-led model for stakeholderinformed evaluation. This can be implemented and used by other heritage/volunteer organisations, in order to optimise quality of life impacts for everyone visiting and/or volunteering in museums and galleries Create opportunities for participants to be involved in an inclusive and peer-informed evaluation approach e.g. volunteer graduates co-facilitating stakeholder engagement Support participants to reflect on their own experience and wellbeing through the evaluation process, and encourage practice of reflection
Objectives to deliver on the aims:
Deliver an innovative programme of evaluation that breaks new ground and delivers new insight into the role of heritage volunteering programmes in supporting wellbeing Provide understanding as to how the project helps individuals gain improved health and wellbeing Focus on the longitudinal impact (6–18 months) of the project on individuals’ health and wellbeing Demonstrate wider social return, financial value and economic impact Embed evaluation at the project's core Be relevant, appropriate and accessible to all our stakeholders Encompass if values (in the figure above) within the evaluation process
Graph 1. Inspiring Futures core project values
2. Methodology using SROI in Year 1: A longitudinal study The evaluation approach is designed to deliver on the objectives set out above in Section 1. However it has been an important factor for the if team that the Envoy evaluation team have been able to blend key strengths in putting people at the heart of their SROI analysis. The collaborative, human and inclusive approach has enabled participants with different backgrounds, abilities and needs to contribute their own personal insight, honest reflection and experience to underpin and define outcomes measurement. This ability to be both people-focused, approachable and engaging is imperative for the integrity of the technical and quantitative aspects of the SROI analysis, as well as supporting the experience of participants. Static reporting frameworks, no matter how sophisticated, often risk providing only narrow evidence on which to base decisions, rather than demonstrating the dynamic flows of value between different functions and outcomes, over the short and long term. Therefore the if evaluation team sought to use SROI at the outset, in combination with wellbeing change measurement. This provides an innovative holistic approach that matches the aspiration and ambition of the programme. The project involves a wide range of stakeholders and participants including heritage venues, training providers, museum staff, signposting and referral agencies, young people, older people, ex-service personnel and museum visitors. The approach integrates the voice of all key stakeholders throughout the programme (qualitative information), enables stakeholders to define which outcomes mattered to them most, identifies the process and drivers of how changes in outcomes are brought about, and quantifies the magnitude and value of this change over time (quantitative data, linked to the qualitative). In summary the methodological approach includes the following: quantification of Social Return on Investment (SROI)
measurement of wellbeing change
observed participant behavior
qualitative depth interviews
ongoing tracking of selected case studies
quantitative data and annual surveys of a broad sample of the learners to record change at different points in their journey.
The engagement and data collection plan from year 1 is provided below for reference. Table 1. Evaluation engagement and data collection summary to date Qualitative research & Stakeholder engagement (SROI Stage 1 & 2) Depth interviews with 7 Venues' key co-ordinators or managers Depth interviews with 3 referrers and critical friends in the community Depth interviews with 3 strategic stakeholders e.g. local authority, housing, health charity Depth interviews with 21 volunteers across all training venues Group consultations with 45 Volunteers at training venues: Week 1 & Week 10 training Observed participant behaviour visits at 5 venues Providing 2 volunteers with support and opportunities to develop their facilitation skills Outcomes survey from 6 venues Outcomes survey from 32 volunteers from first year intake Post programme group consultation with 10-15 Graduate Volunteers (Taking place Year 2) Visitor survey data will take place going into year 2
SROI is unique in its ability to translate the measurement of social values into economic language. It is a stakeholder-informed cost-benefit analysis that uses a broader understanding of value for money. The process assigns values to social and environmental outcomes as well as economic outcomes. Its development in the UK has been driven by organisations such as the new economics foundation and the SROI Network, and has been funded by the Cabinet Office (through the old UK Office for the Third Sector) and Scottish Government (through the SROI Project).i It is increasingly used to measure value-for-money and is recommended by the National Audit Officeii, and aligned to the principles set out in HM Treasury Green Book. A summary of the methodological steps followed is illustrated below, and described in detail throughout this report.
SROI has been successfully applied to strategic decision-making across a wide range of investment and policy areas, including apprenticeships and employment, regeneration, social housing services and adaptations, crime, and health services. The process focuses on the capture and measurement of stakeholder-informed outcomes as well as outputs (see Chart 1 below). Chart 1: SROI process (theory of change)
SROI can also capture the way that identified outputs contribute to outcomes and their necessary pre-requisites, and as such captures the logic that underpins the inherent process of change. Once this is identified and tested, it is easier to identify appropriate indicators that demonstrate the magnitude of change. Understanding social outcomes has become increasingly important in recent years. The National Audit Office’s guidance on Value for money and TSOs (Third Sector Organisations) within the Successful Commissioning Toolkit states: “Make sure your programme is really focused on outcomes, the impact on service users and communities that you are seeking to achieve, and not just on outputs, process or inputs. Not all outcomes will be obvious, direct or easily valued. You and/or providers may need to use evaluations and techniques such as Social Return on Investment (SROI) to establish the full impact of a programme and its worth”.1
if is one of few examples where an organisation has committed to understanding and evidencing whether its activities have a sustainable impact that provides a social return over time. The data collection is therefore an ongoing exercise, and will only be fully completed in year 3 (2016). Further steps in evaluation are now required to track the destination of the first year cohort several months post-placement. Data will also be collected from a small sample of visitors interacting with if Volunteers, and combined with existing visitor data and information from the partner venues.
3. Background to Inspiring Futures: Volunteering for Well-being (if) if will help 225 participants, 75 per year, move away from social and economic isolation or exclusion through heritage volunteering and tailored accredited training. In each intake, volunteers undergo intensive accredited training and an immersive volunteering experience in a historic and/or cultural museum (or gallery) environment. Through this, the programme aims to be of deeper benefit to participants through significantly improving their social, mental and emotional wellbeing.
The development of new skills and knowledge amongst volunteers, whilst important as an objective designed into the project, is not the main focus. if is not oriented towards being an employability programme. Learning opportunities core to the project include heritage training courses, volunteering placements at the selected partner venues, volunteer-to-volunteer mentoring, understanding wellbeing, and the chance to visit and learn from a range of national and local heritage venues. Participants receive accredited 10 week training, and a 6 to 8 week placement at one of the venues. Their roles range from object handling and/or interpretation, administrative and marketing support, to improving a venue's face-to-face interaction with visitors. Participant recruitment is targeted especially towards individuals with a background of non-severe mental and emotional health issues, or are long term unemployed, young people aged 16-25, over 50s, or are ex-military service personnel. IWM North and Manchester Museum had already established sector wide recognition for their award winning inclusive volunteer programmes. To continue their search for good practice, if aims to be the first major project to measure the impact of socially engaged volunteering in the heritage sector, exploring how it can combat social and economic isolation and improve wellbeing. It will seek to evidence how the programme benefits individuals, organisations and society. The evaluation process chosen for the project (Social Return On Investment analysis) aims to go beyond what is typical for the museum sector, in terms of measuring and valuing the project's wider impact, focusing on health and wellbeing outcomes for individuals, yet also assessing how processes and operations can be continuously improved during the three year programme. It is hoped that, in turn, partner venues will benefit from a valuable and well-trained volunteer base reflective of the local community, an enhanced visitor experience, and extended access and interpretation to the collections.
Project implementation process The project's implementation can be set out in four main steps:
Selection and recruitment
The project is promoted through carefully selected referrers and partner community sector organisations, including Job Centre Plus, local volunteering referrers, and organisations supporting old and younger people. It is also advertised in local press. After promoting and advertising the project to target audiences, the selection and recruitment process comprises: an open day presentation at a training venue with project co-ordinators and existing volunteers; followed by one-to-one interviews with each potential participant. This facilitates a more in-depth and personal understanding of each individual's potential trajectory and benefit sought, through sharing each person's background, hopes, concerns and objectives. Most participants are chosen on the basis of who would benefit the most from the programme. They are assessed on their availability to attend for the duration of the programme. If they are employed or attending college then the opportunity is not suitable because they need to be available during work / college hours. Many people who attend are long term unemployed, registered disabled or retired who are socially isolated and want to do something with their spare time whilst they look for meaningful employment, training and or voluntary opportunities. ď‚ˇ
Successful applicants are then required to attend an accredited 10 week training course, of 6 hours per week at one of the main training museum venues - in this case either IWM North, Manchester Museum or the Museum of Science and Industry. The course is developed and delivered by The Manchester College and provides in-depth training, experiential group work and technical content. The tutor uses the rich resources of the museums to deliver a bespoke training package.
Individuals learn about the remit of the museums and volunteer roles whilst gaining the following Open Award units in Customer service skills, Communication skills and Heritage skills.
Team building – ‘protect the egg activity’
Part way through the programme (week 6) participants gain on gallery work experience for the duration of the course, for which individuals are ‘buddied’ up with an existing volunteer. Feedback from a small number of volunteers suggested they could be better prepared at the end of the training for the transition from being part of a group, and going into more of an autonomous individual role as a volunteer. This seems to be the case especially for individuals who may tend towards anxiety or low short-term resilience/coping resources when "going it alone", although it was evident that after the first week of volunteering and induction that these concerns and perceptions dissipated. For example one participant stated "it felt like being dropped into the deep end without really knowing what it would be like".
Placement and interaction
At the end of the training course, participants can volunteer for a further six weeks at their host venue or move on to a placement at one of the heritage partner venues: o o o o o o o
National Trust Dunham Massey Manchester City Galleries Manchester Jewish Museum Museum of Science and Industry Ordsall Hall People’s History Museum Whitworth Art Gallery
Volunteers completing their training have an opportunity to convey their preferred choice of location and role for a minimum 6 week volunteering placement, though in some cases it is not always possible to allocate based on preference, as allocation needs to match to the needs of all the partner venues. We have not assessed or been informed of any negative values if an individual is particularly disappointed in this case, but will consider this going forward. Volunteer roles mainly include either one or a combination of the following, and nearly all comprise of direct personal interaction with visitors, and providing guidance or knowledge about the collections and venue: o o o o
Object handling Front of House information or Visitor Welcoming Administration or Marketing support Family Learning.
Knowledge transfer between the community of Manchester venues
Part of the if project also aims to generate and share learning across partner venues, especially around best practice in recruitment from non-technical or disadvantaged backgrounds, managing volunteer's wellbeing and positive functioning in venues, feeding back the impacts of volunteering on individuals with higher needs, and reflecting on what can improve in current implementation of their volunteering model. This can result in creating a more diverse volunteer force, or gaining internal buy-in for volunteer recruitment change across different business units. This has required (and will continue to require) discipline and engagement across existing platforms, such as Cultural Volunteer Co-ordinators Forum (CVCF), and also commitment to communication from the lead and partner venues. The lead venue (IWM North) is also visiting partner venues more often on a face-to-face basis, to foster a community of good practice, and better understand and reinforce learning processes and resulting action points. The project has also developed a good practice guide which is hosted on the project website www.volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk
"My friends are saying things like "you've totally changed, you've got that thing back about you - you're taking an interest, you're more with it" - so itâ€™s clear if volunteering has helped improve my relationships with people, got me giving more of myself - I'm now at a more positive level"
Lindaâ€™s Case study
Before Linda participated in if, she was feeling isolated and lonely. She had been unemployed for a number of years after bringing up seven children on her own after her husband died. Linda heard about the programme through Manchester Volunteer Centre. The project really resonated with her, as she had always loved history and art. At first Linda was a little overwhelmed, but when she gained her place on the programme she was elated, happy and excited. "It felt like the beginning of a new journey in my life. The activities on the course were very engaging and stimulating. We learnt about object handling, conservation, visited different galleries and went behind the scenes. I felt very incredibly privileged and it was an amazing opportunity to learn from Museum staff as we learned from each other. I felt a sense of belonging and included in all aspects of Museum life. Our tutor from The Manchester College taught us skills that will last for life. She gave us more self-awareness and greater understanding of others and different cultures. We learnt about customer service, how to interact with the public, health and safety and teamwork. Many of these key skills and knowledge are important for my role as a volunteer and will be transferable for future employment. They will greatly enhance my chances of getting jobs in the future. " Linda started her role as an object handling volunteer at Manchester Museum in the New Year (2014), greeting and speaking to visitors, sharing knowledge about the objects and inspiring people by giving them the opportunity to handle real Museum objects and to engage in a very tangible way with the interpretation of the collection. "I am enthused by the experience and it spills over to them, our role triggers a positive interaction which creates a happy memory for them and encourages learning. I feel like have purpose and am part of a team while making a valuable contribution to my local community." Through this project, Linda also met some great people and made friends that she hopes to have for many years to come. The experience has been socially and culturally enriching. The programme increased Linda's knowledge of history, the arts and science and an insight into how accessible all the Museums and galleries are in the Manchester area. Linda now regularly encourages family and friends to visit. "All these activities increase my sense of belonging and feeling of being valued, which increased my happiness and wellbeing immensely. My experience has inspired my children and family, they see me as an older adult and realise it is never too late to learn, they are very proud of me. The programme has given me so much confidence, inspired my desire to learn and renewed my enthusiasm for life as a result." You can watch Linda in our short 3 minute film on the webpage. www.volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk
4. Literature and research: Heritage volunteering and wellbeing Heritage and arts venues can be sustainable key partners in generating improved wellbeing and life satisfaction for people. DCMS' analysis for Quantifying and Valuing the Wellbeing impacts of sport and culture (Fujiwara et al, 2014), estimates that culture/arts engagement can bring about life satisfaction improvements worth £1,084 per person per year. This draws on an in-depth statistical analysis linking life satisfaction responses to household income and spending behaviors across a range of key activities. Admittedly however, separating out the most significant components between mental, emotional, and physical health, or their benefit periods from impacts are not yet clear in this work. Interest in wellbeing is growing both nationally and internationally and the UK is regarded as one of the leading countries in this area in terms of measurement, innovative uses of wellbeing data and academics in the field. International focus has been on how societies, governments, communities and populations measure their progress, in more holistic ways– including the UK’s Legatum Institute’s Commission on Wellbeing and Policy (www.li.com/programmes/thecommission-on-wellbeing-and-policy). In November 2010, a national ‘measuring wellbeing’ programme was launched to be undertaken by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) and driven by public consultation. ONS now publishes regular wellbeing reports (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/user-guidance/well-being/index.html) and data at a national and local level, and has developed a measurement tool for wellbeing comprising ten domains. A recent All Party Parliamentary Group on Wellbeing Economics (http://parliamentarywellbeinggroup.org.uk/) has published a report on translating wellbeing evidence into policy, which argues that “the time is right to move from national wellbeing measurement to a national wellbeing strategy, setting government policy 4 in the context of the overarching aim of promoting wellbeing – to include tackling low wellbeing and wellbeing inequalities.”iii This is further reflected in the research drive from the Economic and Social Research Council, focusing on evidence from "What Works Wellbeing"iv towards achieving public policy objectives. It is a goal of the Government to account for wellbeing in policy decisions. There is demand locally on how to improve wellbeing eg from Health and Wellbeing Boards and from businesses. Wellbeing is valued as an outcome in itself and is also instrumental to other outcomes. It is affected by a wide range of policies and services. Personal wellbeing is a potential common currency for measuring social impact and it is increasingly measured and available both across UK surveys and internationally. To know what works, researchers, policymakers and practitioners need to be able to effectively capture and measure impacts. The ONS framework for measuring national wellbeing comprises a complementary mix of objective and subjective indicators. So whilst the cost-benefit of objective views of progress (eg life expectancy, employment) may be better evidenced, there remains a gap around how cost-benefit evidence might be gathered about more subjective measures (eg health satisfaction, loneliness, job satisfaction). Tensions between these measures will need to be addressed, as well as exploring ways of calculating the impacts of different policies on wellbeing. Another area which is not well evidenced is the cost-benefit case for allocating resources to improve wellbeing. English Heritage estimates £1,646 as the wellbeing value of heritage engagement or visiting historic sites through the year (using a similar approach by Fujiwara). The UK's heritage and cultural offer creates deep levels of social and economic value. Visitors from around the world recognise this more and more, as reflected by tourist number increases).
The UK is world renowned for the high quality of its cultural and historic offer, and the value it offers goes beyond the economic and well into life enrichment. According to the report The Impact of Manchester's Cultural Organisations (2014), there are over 4.5 million visits to Manchester’s museums, galleries, theatres and music venues each year. This includes educational visits, a number of repeat visits, and individuals that are visiting more than one attraction. The report estimates that this generates £38.3m of Gross Value Added per year, and supports the generation of a further £48.64m in multipliers or 'ripple effect' spending in other parts of the local economy. Manchester is able to directly generate over £81m of additional tourist expenditure, when accounting for visits to multiple venues. However, the report also states that there is an extensive and diverse range of socially focused activities taking place across Manchester’s cultural organisations with combined aims of increasing engagement in cultural activities, particularly amongst priority groups, and to generate social benefits. Typically, there are over 283,000 engagements including training and outreach programmes and over 341,000 engagements in educational activities. Heritage is therefore also seen as a major contributor to socio-economic wellbeing. Wellbeing is an overarching policy objective further set out by the Parliamentary paper, Wellbeing in Four Policy areas (2014), which combines economic and non-economic aims. Through this document policy makers recognise that experiencing and participating in arts and culture has demonstrable positive impacts on wellbeing, and it is recommended that links between the arts and culture and health, central government (DCMS, the Department of Health and the Department for Communities and Local Government) should work with relevant arts agencies to join up better, and maximise the wellbeing benefit from available budgets. For example, Cultural Commissioning Programme, funded by the Arts Council, specifically supports arts and cultural sector organisations to collaborate with public services and contribute to health, wellbeing and socio-economic outcomes in local communities, councils and health authorities. This is a direct response to the changing public service and policy landscape, as local authorities reduce and cut important services they deliver directly and instead commission them from external providers or integrate them into other major contracts. Local authorities should consider how cultural commissioning might contribute to priorities identified in their Health and Wellbeing Strategies. This challenge must be at the forefront for local authorities who are now also tasked with responsibilities under The Health and Social Care Act 2012, for improving the health and wellbeing of their local populations. Consequently, the challenges for local authorities and health and care services are to work in more joined-up ways with their resources and with local partners from all sectors including heritage, culture and the arts - in order to achieve more outcomes with less resources, and reduce duplication and waste. This is very far from being easy; with an ageing population and rounds of even further government spending cuts still anticipated, available public resources and finances are set to continue reducing into the near future. EH and HLF have also commissioned studies and evaluations demonstrating that individuals gain through engagement with heritage, particularly from enjoyment, a sense of fulfillment, and enrichment, the development of new skills and improved physical and mental health. The key socio-economic outcomes that can be brought about by heritage are mapped out by EH in the useful figure below.
Figure 2. The value and impact of heritage and the historic environment, Heritage Counts 2014, English Heritage
HLF's 2013 review of the value and benefits of heritage identifies ‘widespread agreement that the strongest evidence for the benefits of culture for individuals is found in ‘personal development’: e.g. new skills, experiences, improved confidence, changed attitudes, education support’. HLF commissioned a three year study, Assessment of the social impact of volunteering in HLF projects (2011) of the impact of participating in heritage projects and found that HLF volunteers report levels of mental health and wellbeing that are far higher than for the general population, or for the general volunteering population. Finally there is an excellent body of recent academic work and practical application led by Dr Helen Chatterjee (University College London) demonstrating the clinical health and wellbeing impacts from bringing heritage and historic objects into health and care settings. The HLF funded project, Touching Heritage takes museum objects from UCL collections out to people who by virtue of their health or age would otherwise be excluded from participating in cultural activities. Settings include a range of University Hospital College wards, day centres and residential care
homes, because of connections to health and wellbeing. Discussing and handling museum objects encourages an atmosphere of discovery, stimulation and shared learning. Participation focuses on cultural, tactile and natural diversity and are encouraged to explore objects in relation to their own health and wellbeing as well as make connections, drawing upon participantsâ€™ memories and prior knowledge. Other Heritage volunteering/training studies - a brief analysis Further exploration below of other studies at this point is not exhaustive, but aims to identify categories of approach and focus of the studies. Much of the learning and design of the if project has built on the success of the In Touch volunteering project, which, as part of its evaluation highlighted the potential heritage volunteering has to change peopleâ€™s lives. IWM Northâ€™s previous findings from In Touch provides qualitative and quantitative evidence as to the prevalence of impact reported by participants and visitors, summarised in Figure 3, taken from the report. Figure 3. Project impacts by percentage of cohort reporting improvement
In addition, there is a range of key literature from recent years, providing evidence about benefits of museum-based volunteering. However, the perspectives, stakeholders addressed, and viewpoints vary widely with regards to key outcomes and themes explored. These largely fall into three categories: i) Operational or process management practice of volunteers ii) Outcomes for the heritage sector and venues iii) Satisfaction outcomes for volunteers and visitors For ease of reference, the literature described in this report can be allocated to one of these three categories, and is illustrated below in Box 1.
Box 1. Categories of literature focus - Heritage Volunteering / Training for wellbeing
Oriented towards operational and process management of volunteers University of Greenwich Modelling the Volunteer Experience (2002)
Oriented towards benefits for heritage sector and venues
Association of Independent Museums Successfully Recruiting and Retaining Volunteers (2013)
English Heritage with the Institute for Volunteering, Research Education Volunteering (2008)
Natural History Museum / Inst Volunteering Research Volunteer, Engage, Learn programme (2007)
MLA Working with Volunteers in Collection Care
Oriented towards life satisfaction / wellbeing outcomes for participants or venues HLF / BOP Consulting Assessment of the social impact of volunteering in HLF- funded projects (2010-2011) UCL Touching Heritage (current programme) Happy Museum Project (current programme) Church Conservation Trust / MIND / HLF St Mary at the Quay (current programme) DCMS/Matrix/EPPI Centre â€˜Working paper 8: Understanding and measuring the value of engaging in sport and cultureâ€™
Oriented towards a Multi-level/Holistic analysis drawing on all 3 categories IWM North programme - In Touch (2012) HLF - Assessment of the social impact of volunteering in HLF funded projects (2011) MEAL / Mandy Barnett - Museum of East Anglian Life Learning Programme (2011)
Many studies available on volunteering impact are largely based on qualitative information through interviews of volunteers or visitors, and very few - if any - record impact or change over time at a quantitative level across a range of stakeholders. This appears mostly due to limited budget and scope for rigorous evaluation work. There is much emergent work in policy and research explored previously, but consistency of conceptual wellbeing framework with clear definitions of wellbeing that transfer across to public and clinical health are limited, especially in a heritage or heritage volunteering setting.
Studies oriented towards Volunteer Management practice University of Greenwich Business School's report Modelling the Volunteer Experience (2002) appears to draw on a more human-oriented research approach to identify volunteering outcomes and improving volunteer management processes. The report provides a good framework for illustrating the inter-dependent relationships that underpin the volunteer's quality of experience in situ. This maps a range of stakeholders important to the volunteering process. The report contains some qualitative testimonials about material changes underneath each relationship, but unfortunately there are no in-depth quantitative data of outcomes related to these in the main report. More recently, the Association of Independent Museums guidance paper Successfully Recruiting and Retaining Volunteers (2013) provides good insight into aligning motivation and engagement with effective management processes, policies and training of volunteers. This works towards optimising opportunities for mutual benefits for the venue, volunteer and visitors. The document is in our opinion, very useful for this reason. However, quantitative evidence of the magnitude of benefits over time, other than satisfaction ratings and potential destinations, is limited. Similarly, the Natural History Museum's evaluation report of their Volunteer, Engage, Learn programme (2007) carried out with the Institute for Volunteering Research, provides qualitative evidence of impacts on volunteers (e.g. increased enjoyment, employability, self confidence, knowledge, enthusiasm from young family members) and visitors (changes to how they will experience future museums, enjoyment, depth of understanding and personal "human connection"). However measurement of the scale or magnitude of this change is limited, and therefore the meaningfulness of this change is somewhat lost. The report reverts to exploration of volunteer management best practice, rather than expanding on the scale of impact. Studies oriented towards Outcomes for the heritage sector and venues Alternatively, the London Museums Hub and MLA's guidance paper Working with Volunteers in Collection Care (n.d.) provides a much deeper understanding of outcomes through heritage volunteering for venues and the heritage sector, with some understanding of outcomes and motivations for volunteers (skills, practice, community contribution) and venues. The document provides a good description of the benefits for venues, and risk management strategies when taking on volunteers. Ultimately, the authors supports the sector's interests, and summarises them as: Making the collections more accessible to the public Bringing the community into the museum and behind the scenes, bridging the gap between the museum and the visitor Volunteers learning new skills, developing specialist knowledge and other personal benefits, e.g. gaining confidence Making the working environment more sociable Involving colleagues from other departments in the set-up of projects, e.g. it support in the creation of a collection database for volunteers to use The time volunteers contribute can count as in-kind support for externally-funded projects, to which some museums also attach a monetary value to emphasise its worth. However, again most of the theory and guidance is based on qualitative rather than quantitative evidence. Any mention of wellbeing or quality of life impact is very limited and not explored in a robust conceptual framework.
The evaluation report by English Heritage with the Institute for Volunteering Research Education Volunteering (2008) provides interesting evidence of what works well with regards to volunteering 'infrastructure'. But the document does not deliver any meaningful sense of the scale of impact and outcomes for volunteers. There is limited exploration of what volunteers enjoyed or found most meaningful, though there is passing reference to motivations and "best bits", around learning, meeting people and teaching others. Overall, the guidance provided is more oriented towards difficulties and challenges for venue management and how the sector as a whole benefits from improved practices. Considering the survey and qualitative approach taken, the data and indicators are limited with regards to measuring actual outcomes. Instead there is a focus on satisfaction of volunteers through rating the quality of the placement's infrastructure, rather than reflecting and measuring what important changes happened to life satisfaction and quality of life as a result of volunteering. Studies oriented towards satisfaction Outcomes for volunteers and visitors Most of the literature previously mentioned contains elements of how satisfied volunteers were with their placement, without linking this to any meaningful change or scale of impact to their levels of life satisfaction and/or quality of life or wellbeing. However, there are some areas of research that do focus more on such outcomes for volunteers in heritage. HLF has undertaken an important piece of reporting around assessing social outcomes from heritage volunteering: Assessment of the social impact of volunteering in HLF-funded projects (2010-2011). This provides very useful evidence and a tentative research approach to individual and community level wellbeing measurement through heritage volunteering, and understanding impacts on individuals. This draws on National level wellbeing measurement programme and DCMS/Matrix/EPPI Centre national level research into social impacts of cultural participation. Much of the indicator base explores cognitive skills, autonomy, happiness and life enjoyment, alongside creativity, attitudes and curiosity. However, this assessment approach does not aim to value these outcomes appropriately, and explore the value for money for government/public service level stakeholders (e.g. health and care services) from heritage volunteering. Dr Helen Chatterjee/UCL's Touching Heritage project explored above is a potential thought leader for heritage in health settings (http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/touching-heritage). The outcomes of research to date "have indicated considerable health and wellbeing benefits for participants of object-handling sessions, and an interesting and novel partnership between heritage collections and healthcare environments." MB Associates SROI of the Museum of East Anglian Life's work-based learning programme for unemployed participants, evidences the additional personal well-being and confidence value, as well as skills and employability value of venue-based learning and training: Social Impact, Museums of East Anglian Life (2011). The report is focused primarily on socio-economic outcomes, and to an extent the systems in which museums operate. It also explores some best practice aspects of the project delivery, although the focus of the research was not required in the area of operational management or wellbeing practices. The report's findings align to some extent with if, in demonstrating the capacity to create social value by breaking negative cycles of isolation, demotivation and exclusion, especially amongst young adults. The Happy Museum Project (http://www.happymuseumproject.org) draws on positive psychology research and wellbeing research taken originally from the new economics foundation and is now strongly influenced by Daniel Fujiwaraâ€™s research to underpin key wellbeing and visitor engagement outcomes for successful museums. This is strongly reflected in their programmes around Well-being and Sustainability in museums, and drawing on the Five Ways to Well-being (Connect, Take Notice, Keep Learning, Be Active, Give) also based on nef research. The project also portrays an alignment to SROI principles around valuing what matters.
nef also produced a stream of evaluation guidance for HLF based on the key principles of SROI and impact mapping, called Prove It (2000), which finds close alignment with the approach taken here in this report. Well-being outcomes from volunteering in general are documented in research by Government Office for Science, Foresight: Mental Capital and Well-being (2008, with nef's evidence), the Cabinet Office's National Survey of Volunteering and Charitable Giving (2007) and DWP's Wellbeing and civil society: Estimating the value of volunteering using subjective wellbeing data (Fujiwara et al, 2013). Where there appears to be inconsistency with international and national level Wellbeing research in general, where life satisfaction is seen as a sub-component of overall wellbeing, it may be best to draw on conceptual frameworks from the Centre for Mental Health, NICE and other public health bodies, for consistency and validity in health circles. This has been trialled and recommended in the Manchester context, by the New Economy Manchester guidance on valuing wellbeing outcomes under Community Budget pilots in the city. At a more local level, the St Mary at the Quay project, led by MIND and The Churches Conservation Trust and funded by HLF, focuses on volunteering in heritage towards community wellbeing outcomes, particularly sense of belonging, confidence, life opportunities, connection, life satisfaction, quality of life and resilience. This has been designed on an outcomes framework and stakeholder engagement process prior to works taking place, and will be of interest to research in future. It is also important to consider emerging evidence that may be relevant to explaining the factors of why heritage spaces are successful for visitors, staff and volunteers. Research in built environment and neurological sciences further supports, and may lie at the heart, of how learning and physical environments of museums and galleries (and other similar settings) affect mental capacity, wellbeing and overall life performance.
Stephen’s case study
As someone in their late 50s, Stephen had found for a few years that it was extremely difficult to find work in a tough labour market especially for his demographic group. "Before coming on to the if programme, I was feeling despondent, stuck in a deep hole, and I couldn't see the light. I was being ground down, and eventually ended up having to live in sheltered accommodation. I felt so isolated" Stephen felt daunted at first, especially as he felt there was a lot at stake in sensing he was "on a slippery road, a rapid downward spiral" - but he quickly realised the if training and volunteering experience was thoroughly enjoyable. The programme built up a sense of self-belief, and meaningful contribution to other people. "It’s made me interact more, made me want to get out and about, given me a bit of pep. I get up and look forward to volunteering and would love to do more - I love being here in this museum. And I want to feel like I'm contributing and giving something back to Manchester...I just wish the volunteering hours were longer" Community focus, and contributing to people's experience are important drivers for Stephen in his volunteering. And through the interaction with others in the group, fulfilling a role in which he can transfer knowledge to others and connect to other people across Manchester and its history, he feels a strong sense of confidence, connection, new energy and significantly reduced sense of isolation. "It’s definitely worthwhile, interacting and connecting with people...it’s been very enjoyable - what can I compare it to? The next best thing would be a job offer, or maybe the feeling might be where you win the prize, like decent-sized premium bond!" Stephen feels he has developed new opportunities, even as someone from an older demographic - he is looking forward to doing an ECDL course level 2 for office support. "My friends are saying things like "you've totally changed, you've got that thing back about you - you're taking an interest, you're more with it" - so it’s clear if volunteering has helped improve my relationships with people, got me giving more of myself - I'm now at a more positive level"
5. SROI stage 1 - Identifying scope, stakeholders and outcomes Having defined above how Inspiring Futures: Volunteering for Wellbeing (if) is implemented, described the evaluation process being followed, and considered the findings and viewpoints from other secondary literature, this section identifies key material stakeholders of the project, the main project activities related to them, and the scope of our analysis. In listing material stakeholders below in Table 3, we are considering those who are affected by, or affect, the project's activities and objectives, in ways that bear a significant influence on their decision-making, actions, performance or benefits experienced. Including stakeholders' testimonial means that the SROI analysis is best positioned to measure and value the outcomes that matter most to those groups. It should be noted that impacts on wider local community will only be reviewed and identified through longitudinal study in Year 2.
Table 3. Stakeholder list and audit trail Stakeholder if Volunteers
Partner placement venues
Local Authority / Government
Local health care / public health services and agencies Visitors
Family / Relations of volunteers
Other venues / the heritage Sector
Method of engagement 2 x Group consultation preand post-training
Analysed within model Yes
Considerations for decision Direct beneficiary
One-to-one interviews (in situ or telephone) Group consultation & one-to-one interviews pre- and post-placements One-to-one interviews
Secondary research (Red) and short interviews in situ One-to-one interviews
TBC in upcoming research
Yes (from Yr 2)
There are some limited but direct impacts on resources depending on beneficiary outcomes There are some limited but direct impacts on resources depending on beneficiary outcomes Their experience and actions are in part determined by the volunteers' performance Whilst they should not influence the project's implementation, there are some material outcomes dependent on beneficiary outcomes
Not yet, except for counterfactual (deadweight) analysis
This will be better informed later in the project using longitudinal findings
This list accounts for the relevance of the stakeholder groups, and of the outcomes arising for them. This means that we have assessed whether a sufficient magnitude of social value has been created for that group, as a proportion of the whole, to warrant inclusion in the calculation. This is in order to focus the theory of how change arises towards the most meaningful outcomes, whereby the exclusion of these outcomes would significantly influence the project or stakeholder's decision-making. Whilst we have spoken to and drawn on the experience of the project co-ordinators, this analysis identifies between stakeholders that are material to the organisationâ€™s inputs (e.g. funders and staff) and those that are material in terms of outcomes (e.g. volunteers). Below, we describe how specific project activities have a material impact on stakeholders. > if Volunteers Key activities: Participants find out about if through a range of media or an individual referrer/ support worker. In particular, the programme is advertised via email to local agencies and key workers, selected local press and promoted online through its own website www.volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk. if project co-ordinators also promote to local agencies, and brief them on the aims, features, and target groups who might benefit most. Local agencies refer individuals to get in touch with the project co-ordinators, in order to attend an open day information presentation, and hear from previous volunteers in addition. In this case, much depends on the awareness and ability of local agencies to signpost appropriate potential participants to the project. Following the open day presentation, potential participants are interviewed on a one-to-one basis, to explore their background, discuss the training and placement process, expectations, concerns, queries, as well as the needs and aspirations of each individual. This can be a boost in itself and, for the majority of participants, breaks a long-run cycle of rejection or exclusion from opportunities that they have applied for previously. e.g. employed roles, projects, volunteering, further training or education. At the start of the process, it is felt by volunteers that overall, the project is a great opportunity to improve their sense of self efficacy, improve or regain their social relationship skills, and do something worthwhile and productive for the benefit of their community and its heritage. Being accepted on the 10 week course and volunteering placement is felt - by almost all participants - to be a great boost to their sense of self worth and life satisfaction. But at the same time, this carries a level of nervousness about starting something so new with a completely new group of people, after having experienced long periods of time either rejected from social and economic opportunities, or at a social or economic disadvantage.
For training, participants attend a weekly 6-hour accredited training session, with a mix of classbased interaction and learning, and some museum based learning (see page 6). To date this has been delivered through Manchester College, although an important and successful factor is the inclusion of meeting venue staff at all levels, and sharing their input and expertise with participants during classes and tours. Early feedback from participants highlighted issues with the college approach, such as having a disproportionately heavy component of induction paperwork, and wanting more venue-based learning and practical application of training within the operational aspects of the venue, (as opposed to class-based learning in the administrative section of the venue). This balance is being addressed for future cohorts, and generally the quality and approachability of teaching style was very well received. Participants also recognised that learning pace and ability would not be uniform across their class, and in some cases their experience improved the empathy and allowances given to colleagues who were low on confidence or different learning abilities. It should be noted that when on placement, many participants felt they wanted to do slightly more volunteering on their day, closer to 3-3.5 hours, than the 2-3 hours allocated to them. This was felt to be as much about making best use of their time spent travelling and settling down on the day, as the enjoyment of the role and being with colleagues. The team evaluate the course after each cohort and refine the training using the constructive feedback from participants. The if project team has requested that Manchester College works more closely to embed the training more within the venue and heritage knowledge. i.e. use the resources and spaces within the museums to complete the learning units . The college has committed to integrating specific changes, including further gallery learning in addition to traditional classroom methods and group discussions.
â€œOur tutor from The Manchester College taught us skills that will last for life. She gave us more self-awareness and greater understanding of others and different cultures. We learned about customer service, how to interact with the public, health and safety and teamwork. Many of these key skills and knowledge are important for my role as a
volunteer and will be transferable for future employment. They will greatly enhance my chances of getting jobs in the future."
After completing their training, if Volunteers are then allocated to their initial placements, with a specific assigned role. Most volunteers are trained to be capable in helping visitors, providing guidance and information, and / or performing front-of-house and greeting duties. A small number have also been successful in providing office-based administrative and marketing support, working with venue management teams. Around two thirds of volunteers perform object handing roles, whereby they present visitors with essential information, stories and narrative about how specific objects or artefacts relate to the collection and heritage interpretation of the venue. This aims to bring a more human, interactive experience to visitors, whilst bringing to life the collection in a very direct way to a range of audiences and families.
A key differentiator of heritage volunteering evident in interviews is that volunteer outcomes are underpinned by gaining a strong sense of connectedness to people and events - not just to visitors - but to people across time. This strong connectedness to events and human experience across time appears to be enhancing the level of self-awareness, belonging, imagination and ability to narrate and relate better to others, and thus improve social relationships.
"Its been more about the human side, and tapping into the emotion. I get more connectivity from interacting with the stories... how I look and speak - I can orient the content with sensitivity, more empathy, more creativity - I did my own interpretation about women's roles in the war; celebrating achievements of women in war - I'm now more skilled at bringing it to a reflective point for the visitors to connect also."
"Museums and galleries are opportunities to grow, understand and gain knowledge about our world, the past and ultimately our place in the world ... I feel grateful to have an abundance of great museums and galleries in Manchester"
" ..Really positive environment, and a good group to connect with, and good sense of community"
Exit and transition On completion of their 6 week placement, staff support individuals to move on. The team conduct short interviews throughout the placement at the beginning, middle and end. Within these conversation participants are supported in establishing and working towards short term and long term goals after the placement has completed. The team signposts participants to find:
Further learning – The training provider, The Manchester College, will offer volunteers access to further courses and advice, guidance and support on future skills development, and careers planning. New volunteering opportunities – At the end of the programme, volunteers may continue to volunteer at their chosen venue, or will be offered further opportunities at organisations across the city.
Employment â€“ Learning new skills and gaining volunteering experience is central to this programme. Participants of previous programmes have secured jobs in both the cultural and non-cultural sector
Top-rated training activities according to volunteers Touring and being quizzed about the venue Behind the scenes group exploration Volunteer buddying Improving presentation skills in front of people Object handling
Volunteer comments as to why Highly engaging to see how to apply learning and practice Felt privileged, important to be granted insight. Also highly stimulating. Gave confidence and good guidance, helped improve resilience Improved self belief and could see the results Stimulating and engaging, made the learning and knowledge more tangible and real
> Placement Venues Relevant activities: Partner venues take on if-trained volunteers on 6-week placements. Their contact and/or presence amongst participants is more significant in the latter stages of the training component where they are presented in more detail for volunteers to familiarise and better understand the venues - and of course, until placement induction commences on site. The team also engages partner venues further to support the process, and learning practices or ongoing feedback, by carrying out frequent visits to each partner venue's co-ordinator. Even after accounting for incremental staff time and travel expenses to manage new if volunteers, it is clear that partner venues gaining further well-trained volunteers has provided an increase in operational capacity for that venue. This has improved access to collections for more visitors, who otherwise perhaps would not have the opportunity to interact with the collections on a more meaningful and human level. The experience of more handling table interactions for example is likely to have led to visitor recommendations to future visitors, and reflects a more meaningful interpretation of the venues and their collections. Other key benefits have been generated by the if project partnership model, across improving volunteer management and recruitment practice, and influencing organisational culture around how volunteers are positively impacted by the approach espoused by if. "Other benefits include sharing best practice via Cultural Volunteers Co-ordinators Forum. Linking with other Placement partners. Helping us to develop links with different communities and partners e.g. Job Centre Plus, charities. Diversify our volunteer force, which is predominantly white and male.... (Also) existing volunteers have had to adapt to a change in recruitment strategy â€“ recruiting volunteers who are not from a Science/ Industrial Heritage background. We are talking openly about wellbeing and the impact volunteering can have on individuals rather than just seeing a benefit to the organisation". Museum of Science and Industry volunteer co-ordinator "This volunteer gave me the opportunity to explore developing an office based volunteering opportunity for someone with limited mobility and physical ability...(and get) increased buy-in from other departments, after such positive experiences with the first placement." Dunham Massey volunteer co-ordinator "All staff managing if volunteers are made aware that they (if volunteers) may need more support in the form of 1:1 conversations. Checking in with them to make sure they are
feeling motivated and involved. We do this for all volunteers, but we do spend more time thinking about the if volunteers and being aware of how they may be feeling." Manchester Art Gallery volunteer co-ordinator
> Visitors and the community Relevant activities: By developing a broader base of volunteers, who are skilled in visitor care and object handling, as well as administrative support, visitors are provided with an enhanced experience at the venue. Most of the contact time is either front-of-house and in seeking guidance about the venue, or at key points within the collection. Interactions as object handling tables brings about a heightened sense of connectedness to the interpretation and meaning of the collections, as well as to the local area.
> Relatives of Volunteers Relevant activities: Relatives are important in providing encouragement to participants throughout the process, in some cases giving them the push or motivation to complete application forms, attend the open day presentation and any, initial interviews/one to ones. They are also helpful in helping to validate the outcomes that participants tell us are being achieved, and are able to confirm via stakeholder interviews, the validity of the outcomes being identified. "My children see an improvement in my confidence and they feel proud that their mother 'works' at the museum. It shows them that we can always develop and grow in new ways, despite age and circumstancesâ€?. It is a common observation by family members interviewed that they are highly surprised by the positive impacts the project has had on the participant's sense of wellbeing, self efficacy and capabilities. Family members are encouraged by most if volunteers to visit the venue/s more often, and in many cases they do. "I'd never expected this because of what he's been through and where he was at. I thought "He'll not do that" but I've been really surprised, he's interacting more with people, retaining more of the skills and knowledge - the ethos of the place is important, less pressure here. I'm happy because he's happy. Quite a bit less worried and more encouraged these days." Father of if Volunteer "Really amazing, what this achieves for their well-being...it's had such a positive impact so far, even just being around him and talking to other people, getting him to come such a long way. Far healthier in himself... And its better for our relationship (less worry) in the family, makes us happy for him" Mother of if Volunteer "Family have noticed significant improvement in my mental health, and are very proud of me because they doubted I'd be able to cope" if Volunteer > Local agencies, referrers and critical friends
Relevant activities: Local agencies are involved with if, as referrers, promoters or critical friends of the project. This includes Job Centre Plus, local volunteering support organisations, such as Manchester Community Central (MACC), Greater Manchester Centre for Voluntary Organisation (GMCVO), Breakthrough UK - a disability and independent living support charity, Valuing Older People and the Poppy Factory. These groups aim to support their disadvantaged service users or volunteers into improved overall well-being, by unlocking access to broader life opportunities, skills generation, reduced socio-economic exclusion and increasing employability (thereby reducing long-term unemployment costs and health care costs to the economy). The local authority's cultural strategy team and adult social service resources are also indirectly impacted by the if project. This in terms of the project supporting improvements in cultural offer, and generating potential resource-saving impact on adult social care where participants are at high risk or in potentially severe cases of low mental and emotional - or even physical - health. "From my point of view my client is easier to talk to, easier to help them.. its outcomes for me. For the wider community – a more diverse range of people at the museum. People who go there will be healthier, happier, have more to do...I’ve not seen any client make such progress in such a short space of time as one of my client has done". Support broker, Breakthrough UK "I help people take small steps - I've worked with museums before, and the feedback I’ve heard is very good and have seen a big change in people – I don’t think there is a better way of achieving the positive outcomes. Confidence has grown, they are very supportive, and there is constant development for an individual who may not have worked for a long time - even small steps like turning up, timekeeping, self awareness, noticing the change in themselves.... The main aim is to get the individual to employment further down the line. ...From the Governments point of view it's giving something to refer people to which they are going to get something constructive from. It's about confidence that yes people can do something constructive and do something worthwhile in the future." Advisor, Job Centre Plus
One stakeholder or agency that should be considered as becoming part of the project delivery model are registered social landlords (RSLs), or housing associations. This report would recommend that the project approaches local RSLs through their senior managers or community investment teams. A good number of if volunteers receiving benefits from the state also live in social housing. There will be an outcome for the RSLs in sustaining tenancies and improving tenant wellbeing that if can help accelerate. Potential volunteers (and by extension, recommended visitors) could be referred to the programme via appropriate channels. "It could also be better for us to manage the tenants. People go on to flourish and do better things with their life it helps to support the business and creates life opportunities for them. It also saves tangible money for the tax payer." CEO St Vincent's Housing Association > Heritage sector Relevant activities: Other local venues in the heritage sector may benefit from the increased future pool of competently skilled volunteers, who will have relevant experience and appreciation of 'behind the scenes' museum administration, visitor care and customer expectations, and object handling / interpretation related to collections. In this sense, the outcomes around operating capacity, collections access and enhancing interpretation, may result in similar changes to those experienced by current partner venues. However, this is dependent on longitudinal destinations
and ongoing monitoring over 2014-2016. Going forward the evaluation will explore longer term benefit to the heritage sector e.g. transferable work/volunteer force, project participation opportunities.
6. SROI stage 2 - provisional Impact Map and Theory of Change The material changes or outcomes described by stakeholders during the engagement process are presented in the provisional Impact Map below - Table 4. Other changes of material importance were also evident during participant observation and informal interviews. (Final outcomes in bold) Table 4. Provisional Impact Map summary Stakeholder
Selection process Induction Training Group work Interaction with existing volunteers & staff Placement/work experience Feedback processes
Number of volunteers completing training
- Overall wellbeing / life optimism - Reduced depression - Self belief / self worth - Resilience / coping skills - Improved social relationships/relationship skills - Sense of purpose / contribution from citizenship/stewardship - Sense of independence / autonomy - Employability/skills - Improved literacy / attainment
Travel and associated costs
Number of volunteers completing placement Number reporting improved outcomes Number seeking employment & gaining employment or entering further education/training
- Improved knowledge of heritage and museums - Reduced isolation - Imagination, creativity, innovation (mindfulness) - Sharing personal expertise / experiences
Potential negative considerations Potential to be placed in a venue where wellbeing at work is not provisioned for by leadership or between staff or within organisation's culture Potential mismanagement of post-placement expectations / relationship with venue Venues
Management and mentoring time Induction at venue Planning Performance monitoring
Improved diversity Staff skills improvement / learning
- Valued by community - Improved collections handling skills - Improved visitor experience /customer care - Time value of labour / work
40 Collections handling/management Buddying/use of existing volunteers
Number of hours spent on management/mentoring and induction Management hours Improved visitor footfall / satisfaction Improved number of objects on display and cared for Improved resource management
- Well-being at work - Growing long term volunteer and skills pool - Improved internal processes / efficiencies - Organisational development / learning - Improved access and interpretation of collection - Cement strategic alliance with other Manchester museums / pool processes & economies of scale through a central selection, training and brokerage system - Engage new partnerships and equip them for receiving more vols Potential negative considerations Potential dividing lines between existing volunteers and recruitment practices Potential to create unintended conflicts and resource challenges from inadequate wellbeing at work practices / culture
Job Centre Plus Administration resources Time / building knowledge Monitoring
No. of people not being productive/contributing to society
(See outcomes for Government)
No. of people unemployed / claiming JSA No. of people work ready / employable
Charities / Volunteer support organisations Administration resources Time / building knowledge Monitoring
No. of service users / disabled people not being integrated into to society No. of service users / disabled people unemployed
(Less material to the study) - Helps charity's capacity to help them find work - Clients less isolated/depressed - Positive organisational reputation
No. of service users / disabled people work ready / employable Housing associations/Social
Increased number of tenants volunteering
- Sustained tenancies
Potential referrers / stakeholder?
Housing (RSLs) Administration resources Time / building knowledge Monitoring
Increased number of tenants in employment / employable
- Happier tenants - Engaged tenants / citizenship - Reduced arrears if finding employment
Increased number of tenants participating / engaged on estates Increased number of tenants with better wellbeing Reduced likelihood of arrears / voids
Local Authority / Government
Job centre plus support
Increased number of people volunteering
Cultural investment and promotion
Increased cultural heritage offer
Health and Social care support
More visitor expenditure from enhanced cultural heritage programme Increased income tax if entering employment
- Increased quality of destination profile / cultural destination (more visitor expenditure in area, incl transport, complimentary products) - Economies of scale from partnership working - Reduced JSA - Higher income tax if entering employment / project work opportunities - Reduced need/costs for adult social service/care support
Number of cross-sector local partnerships Local health care services
None (except for potential referral administration cost)
Improved numbers of people reporting better health and wellbeing
- GP cost resource savings - Medical cost resource savings (e.g. for depression medication)
Reduced visits/need for GP Reduced need for medication Visitors
Donations Time interacting with volunteers Promotion of volunteers' activities to visitors
Increased no. interactions w/ volunteers Increased length of visit time at venue Increased visitor satisfaction Increased donations? Increased number of objects / collections available for access or interpretation
- Improved overall mental wellbeing - Improved sense of connection with place / venue - Improved levels of advocacy / recommendation - Visitors improve own volunteering / interest in volunteering - Improved sense of enthusiasm / excitement - Improved knowledge
Increased number of visits, especially from key groups e.g. schools Family / Relations of volunteers
Other venues / the sector
- Improved relationship within family - Reduced stress/anxiety - Sense of pride - Improved knowledge about museum and cultural heritage
Increased visits to venue/s
Travel time / cost if accompanying to venue
Number of family members per volunteer household experiencing change
Recruitment and training Use of existing volunteers and staff Monitoring
Increased number of effective volunteers Increased number of people with relevant skills and knowledge
- Improved volunteering best practice/shared learning - Improved skills pool (i.e. recruiting volunteers / staff with experience in the sector) - Reduced training costs (e.g customer care, handling)
Promotion to local residents (e.g. leaflets) Hosting local events Admin costs
Increased community events Increased local interactions Increased visitor numbers Reduced population turnover (less likely to leave area)
- Sense of belonging / pride - Improved advocacy - Reduced isolation - Improved citizenship / participation - Improved knowledge of heritage and museums
Table 4. Provisional Impact Map summary The Impact Map above can be presented in two formats: 1. A logic model format, as in the Impact Map table above, as used in the SROI guide. This presents the inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes that arise for each stakeholder group in a grid. It enables information to be understood quickly and allows a complex theory to be summarised into basic categories. 2. A theory of change format (see below). Unlike a logic model, this is useful in articulating why the outcomes are achieved and how one change leads to another change. They can be useful for helping understand the different pre-conditions that exist (and need to be measured), and for helping understand any potential barriers to change.
The process and outcomes identified within the impact map can also be translated into a theory of change, describing the process of how change is manifested by the if project. This theory of change is represented below. Chart 3. Theory of Change
In interviews, volunteers have reported consistent and significant outcomes identified and experienced across underlying sub-components of mental and emotional wellbeing, in addition to gaining new knowledge, skills and work experience. These aspects tend to relate to reduced levels of isolation, self confidence, improved cognitive and emotional capabilities to operate and perform, in addition to gaining a sense of purpose and self awareness through contributing to local history and local people. What appears to be a key link and differentiator for volunteers is gaining a very deep sense of 'connectedness' to people, ideas, creative concepts and events across time in a museum or gallery setting, helping to contextualise and add meaning - and often sparks of inspiration - to their experience of their lives today. In this case it might not be unreasonable to view the multi-faceted "if volunteer experience", the role of the engaging museum/gallery environment and collections, the learning process, in combination with the socially interactive nature of the role, as significant factors in potentially improving a dynamic state of wellbeing. Almost all volunteers reported that their placement venues and colleagues (staff or fellow volunteers) provided the right level of organisational support to nurture their wellbeing in the venue as a 'workplace' (see Table 5). This is largely down to the venues' internal culture and practices, but also the shared best practice learned through the if project partnership and group communications to share knowledge on the issue.
7. SROI stage 3 - Measurement, evidencing outcomes and giving them a value Having identified the most meaningful outcomes per stakeholder group, and the theory of how changes in those outcomes are brought about by key success factors, the next steps in the methodology are to measure the magnitude of change, and understand how this is valued. A key part of this evaluation seeks to measure and collect quantitative data through primary research, such as volunteer surveys and venue surveys, (in addition to drawing on secondary data and previous research). The purpose of the data collection includes:
Selecting the most appropriate survey questions, especially around wellbeing, built on tried and tested wellbeing framework (see Section 8) with which to measure and value the outcomes identified in the qualitative research in SROI stages 1 and 2. If possible the question design and values should be conceptually and theoretically consistent with the key outcome, and values informed by the stakeholders view on what type of value to assign Collecting evidence as to how much change is created for each material outcome identified Collecting evidence as to the value to the stakeholder of each material outcome from the project Collecting evidence as to the likely levels of deadweight (the likelihood of an outcome happening anyway without the selected programme), attribution (the proportion of change or impact that can be claimed directly by the project) and displacement (the likelihood of any negative outcomes or disbenefits being displaced to another stakeholder or location).
In this context, the outcomes surveys for volunteers incorporated wellbeing questions in addition to other questions about social, economic or financial outcomes. This provided measures of change in wellbeing and other social and economic outcomes as identified in the Impact Map. Copies of stakeholder surveys are also provided in the Appendices of this report. 32 if volunteers completed the volunteer survey from the first year cohort - or just under 50% of the annual cohort. It is important to note that the sample of if volunteers are surveyed in year 1, but will also be followed up in years 2 and 3 to capture further longitudinal change, drop-off effects and destinations, long after their placement has been completed. Therefore, survey results so far are only provisional for year 1, and findings may change slightly over the course of the evaluation and if project timeframe.
From the quantitative research to date, there are clear and significant changes in the identified outcomes experienced by volunteers, when comparing volunteer responses at the end of the placement, retrospectively with how they felt in the 2-3 month period before having heard about the if programme. The change in outcomes comparing "Before" the programme and "Now" at the end of the placements, are illustrated in the three diagrams below. These have been categorised across i) wellbeing, ii) skills transfer and attainment, and iii) perceptions of heritage opportunities, as illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2. Magnitude of change in if volunteer wellbeing
It is very striking that before the programme, on each of these wellbeing indicators, participants are consistently far below most national average scores (which typically range between 0.6 and 0.7 on the scale). Considering the low starting points of participants - albeit that they were carefully selected for this reason - there are significantly high improvements for volunteers reported across identified outcomes for wellbeing, with the largest immediate changes in self confidence, overall wellbeing, resilience and sense of belonging as a result of the if programme (which aligns with improved sense of connection, and reduced feelings of loneliness and isolation identified in interviews).
"Before coming on to the if programme, I was feeling despondent, stuck in a deep hole, and I couldn't see the light. I was being ground down, and eventually ended up having to live in sheltered accommodation. I felt so isolated"
Figure 3. Magnitude of change in if volunteer skills transfer and attainment
Whilst there are significant improvements for volunteers across indicators of skills and volunteering, it is interesting to note that the largest changes are in the ability to learn and transfer new knowledge, including to others - which is further reflected by significant changes to presentation and communication. Volunteers also gain a real sense of direction and inspiration about the type of work they now see themselves as capable of being productive in. This is supported by training content around application processes and presentation of self to others. Almost all volunteers are inspired to continue volunteering beyond the term of the if project. Figure 4. Magnitude of change in if volunteer perceptions of heritage opportunities
As reflected in Figure 4, it is also encouraging for museums and galleries that overall, volunteer perceptions improve with regards to how to identify and create opportunities in the sector, for work, projects and
involvement. Particularly, when looking at starting points before participation, it is positive to see that if volunteers go on to be advocates for the sector, and are more active in referring and recommending others e.g. friends, family, to volunteer and visit museums and galleries.
Further analysis shows the following characteristics of approximately 70-75 if volunteers (year 1): Chart 4. Percentage for broad ethnic groupings 1.0% 1.9% 2.9%
Mixed white and black Mixed white & Asian Black White
South Asian 85.7%
. Around 85% of participants are white British or white (other), with smaller representation from other ethnic groups i.e. African, South Asian, Jewish. There is no representation at all from some other groups e.g. Chinese, Arab, South East Asia, Latin American. The 2011 census indicates that the Greater Manchester area population can be categorised as 84% White, 7% Asian, 2% Black, and just under 1% Chinese, with remaining ethnic groups also mostly around or under 1%. The average age of participants is 35 years old. There is some improvement in over 50s participants in the second cohort compared to the first, but the there is some under-representation of ex-military service personnel target group, (again some improvement in cohort 2, versus cohort 1). There will need to be some clear improvement required in the distribution of representation, if the project is to reflect its aim of broadening diversity across the heritage volunteering pool in the local area.
Almost all participants are from Manchester, with a very small proportion from Bolton, with over three quarters of the cohort receiving benefits for either unemployment (Job Seekers Allowance) / employment and support, or housing, or both. Under 10% of the cohort receive disability allowance.
Chart 5. First year intake Age groups 0%
26-49 50+ 44%
Giving outcomes a value Many of the benefits for participants will be social and in some cases economic. One of the key differences between SROI and traditional Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is that social outcomes (such as wellbeing) are
measured and valued. if volunteer, and relatives', outcomes such as wellbeing and emotional resilience are important not only because these are at the heart of the project, but also because there is a wealth of evidence demonstrating that high wellbeing leads to better productivity, life performance, and capacity to solve challenges and tasks in life, in learning, and in the workplace. Additionally, avoiding a decrease in health and wellbeing from being in training, volunteering, education or employment can accrue to the individual, and also potentially to the health care system, from avoided need. The social outcomes will be harder to measure, and this evaluation draws on existing measurement methods such as nef's National Accounts of Well-beingv (NAWB) combined with Quality Adjusted Life Years (used by health bodies). This is described further in Appendix. The National Accounts of Well-being is a framework for understanding and measuring the different components of wellbeing, and it contains useful questions used in the surveys and at national level. It is useful in SROI for a number of reasons:
It provides a breakdown to isolate different components driving mental, social (and physical) wellbeing (see Figure 5 below), and helps inform us what to measure It provides a set of questions and statistical analysis that has been academically tested, enabling high quality wellbeing measurement consistent with public health audiences It has been tested in previous SROI analyses focusing on wellbeing outcomes, and in Manchester Community Budget pilots It can help with the valuation of outcomes through the use of healthcare economics and Quality Adjusted Life Years or ‘QALYs’. A description is explained in Appendices.
This provides a sound evidence-based framework with which to measure and value the magnitude of change in wellbeing identified in the stakeholder engagement and survey stage. The proportional split of wellbeing outcomes is then valued in conjunction with the National Accounts of Well-being sub-components outlined below in Figure 5. In terms of QALY values for each component underpinning wellbeing, these are matched with the measure of change in the surveys. Figure 5: Well-being valuation framework, drawing on National Accounts of Well-being
Whilst no one method of valuing wellbeing is perfect, we would argue that this approach reflects what the collective population is willing to accept as a threshold annual value for gaining one year of health and
wellbeing. Additionally, it is unlikely that one person would not wish another person to be without that threshold value as an applied minimum. In addition to the use of QALYS to value wellbeing outcomes, a range of tried and tested proxy values, wellbeing valuation measures, and public services unit costs were utilised to quantify the worth of the outcomes to local authority (e.g. adult social care) and public services (e.g. health care). These are described more fully below in the Appendices. Where there are gaps in values, we have drawn on some proxy values provided by DCMS/Fujiwara explored in the literature review, although some may view this as a little broad in terms of valuing different component drivers between mental, physical and social health and wellbeing, it does provide robust estimates where others are lacking.
"If I had not got onto this project, I doubt I'd be on this mortal coil...I had some major problems ... don't think I would've been here for my children - but this has been inspiring and the people I've made friends with, not perfect for everyone, but life changing for meâ€?.
Danâ€™s Case study
In the couple of years before if, Dan had generally become very introvert and quiet, and had previously been severely affected by suffering bullying at work. Sadly, one of Dan's friends committed suicide around this same time also. Life imploded, and Dan appeared to become very withdrawn and negative after having to stop work. This situation was a struggle to overcome, given the deeply negative emotional stressors - often the types of things that can trigger depression, anxiety and break down resilience. Through if, Dan wanted to get back into doing something productive, increase his self-confidence, and learn more to build on his keen interest in history. It was a brave decision and challenge to take. At the start of the programme, Dan would often not talk at all, barely interacting with people around him, sometimes having to leave the room momentarily to regroup or give himself a breathing space. In the immediate short-term, participating in the programme and training has encouraged Dan to start interacting and working with other people again, and sharing stories and communicating well with colleagues and visitors. "I wouldn't have interacted before, but now I'm flourishing more, really look forward to this each week, it helps give me focus... Without this, I wouldn't be succeeding in this way as am now and I'm really proud to be able to say I'm doing this... I have become more of an advocate for museums and galleries, I think that people should be encouraged more to visit them. I'm reading up and learning so much, and I enjoy the friendly atmosphere - I can share knowledge and teach others...I feel ready to work with people again, I'm getting there. One day, maybe in a few years, I can maybe become a museum professional."
Venues In addition to IWM North, Manchester Museum and the Museum of Science and Industry, partner venues of the if project include the People’s History Museum, Manchester Jewish Museum, National Trust Dunham Massey, Manchester City Galleries, the Whitworth Art Gallery and Ordsall Hall.Two venues were not impacted as much as originally planned: the Whitworth Art Gallery has been closed for redevelopment, and at Ordsall Hall volunteer drop-out due to unforeseen circumstances has coincided with a decrease in capacity to take on a volunteer for the time being. However, drawing on interviews and survey responses from all the remaining venues, the evaluation to date finds that:
On average, across all venues, volunteers provided around 2.5-3 hours of volunteering time per week, excluding travel time - this has been valued at minimum wage equivalent in terms of value to the venue, and including further volunteering after the placement Venues spend approximately £20 per month per volunteer on travel allowances Venues report benefitting from improved learning, knowledge transfer and sharing of experiences through committing to the partnership model, (this has been valued using a 9 week professional course for volunteer managers, though this may be an under-estimate as the research progresses into Year 2) Improved diversity is reported, more across age groups and socio-economic backgrounds All venues report staff and management have gained experience to be more confident in managing volunteers with diverse needs and backgrounds There are small improvements in broadening reach to wider audiences but this is not widespread 1-2 venues report that if volunteers in some cases, require more time and support up front to ensure they are managing and feeling ok during the placement There are indications that over half of the venues would have paid on average, £71 per person for some form of volunteer training anyway. The other venues who would not have paid for volunteer training anyway therefore form part of logic of the model Around 40% of if volunteers go on to continue as volunteers at their venue The equivalent of just over 3 new object handling tables - on average, across all venues - has increased visitor interaction and access with the collection The rate of observed visitor interactions, on average ranged from 25 to 30 per hour, although this is skewed slightly by larger venues and large group visits 30% of visitors, according to Ipsos Mori data, attend due to recommendation from a friend, and this has been used in projections relating to broadening the venues' improved reach.
Additionally, further indicators are provided below, in understanding how placements are experienced within the venues. Table 5 illustrates strength of agreement by volunteers of generally good wellbeing and engagement practices of the venue.
Table 5. Volunteer perceptions of wellbeing at Venues as a place of work Staff and volunteers work well as a joined up team Information and feedback flow freely in and around the organisation The organisation is receptive to new ideas and new ways of doing things I get the right amount of support in my role from staff and managers I get the right amount of support from other volunteers
Strongly Agree or Agree 96% 96% 96% 98% 98%
Table 6 illustrates the venues' general perspective about key volunteer characteristics at the start of the placement, compared to at the end of the placement. There are clear improvements reported, which triangulate with some of the experience reported by volunteers. Table 6. Venue perspective of volunteer characteristics Self efficacy and confidence Quality of service Level of skill
Rating at start of placement 0-10 scale 5 6 6
Rating at end of placement 0-10 scale 8 9 8
Table 7 illustrates venues' strength of agreement about behaviours between volunteers and their relationship to heritage. It is interesting to note that feeling integrated into diverse traditions and histories does not score particularly highly - though this is largely due to the local Manchester-focus of the museums, cross-tradition learning and cross-cultural understanding may be an area for improvement. Especially when dealing with a diverse range of visitors from multi-cultural backgrounds. It may also be reflected by low representation of ethnic minorities in the if participant cohort, who may or may not currently feel as significant an association with local cultural heritage. Table 7. Strength of Venue agreement levels about volunteer behaviours if volunteers become strong advocates in the local area for promoting our venue if volunteers are effective at providing heritage knowledge transfer to our visitors if volunteers feel integrated in diverse histories and traditions Our existing volunteers have benefited from interacting with if volunteers
Strongly Agree or Agree 83% 75% 66% 100%
Venues also benefit from generating and sharing learning across and between partner venues. In particular, these include up-to-date public policy developments; and best practice in recruitment from non-technical or disadvantaged backgrounds; managing volunteer's wellbeing and positive functioning in venues; and feeding back the impacts of volunteering on individuals with higher needs; as well as reflecting on improvements to implementation of their volunteering model e.g. creating a more diverse volunteer force. There is an enhanced culture of openness and reflection evident amongst the partner venues, in addition to some impacts to staff development and organisational development. Partner venues are also prepared to undertake responsibility for their own wellbeing activities, including new mindfulness and reflective practice courses. However this community of best practice requires (and will continue to require) discipline and engagement across existing platforms, such as Cultural Volunteer Co-ordinators Forum (CVCF), and also commitment to communication from the lead and partner venues.
The State / local government and partner agencies In terms of outcomes for the state and local agencies, it may be too early in the evaluation to definitively identify this. However unit cost data has been linked to relevant material volunteer outcomes that lead to any material benefit for government and local services. These include the following findings: - Job Seeker's allowance cost per person for volunteers entering employment - Employment destination frequency in the cohort - Limited impact on NHS cost for bundle of mental health cluster assessment, admission to community care and one outpatient incidence. Only a small number (4 volunteers) in the cohort were identified as being at risk of potentially requiring mental health support services
- The incidence of any reduced adult support or care need amongst volunteers was negligible, and remained largely unaffected, however this may well be a delayed outcome for year 2 analysis - The incidence of any reduced housing support needed was unaffected - however there is a question about how the evaluation might be able to capture effects on sustained tenancies. Visitors and community The impact on visitors and communities in which venues are based, is one of the next immediate phases in the evaluation plan. This will be linked to behaviours, attitudes and actions, and potentially triangulated with satisfaction score differentials between visitor types and interaction types.
â€œI started my new job last Thursday; and itâ€™s the if volunteering that gave me the confidence, it got me asking more relevant questions, I was able to bring some insight, and the customer facing skills I developed during volunteering were very valuable - the co-ordinator and tutor are a big part of why I'm now very happy, definitely I've got a much higher sense of personal wellbeing. It's also been great fun, meeting good people, making new friends and going on trips together outside of the volunteering"
Ruth's case study "Before Inspiring Futures, I wasn’t really doing much with my life...I left college in 2012, because I was really sick, ... [at the start of 2013 I was diagnosed with an illness], so that wasn’t so good. And after that I really wasn't doing anything – I was just sitting at home feeling miserable all the time. And then I discovered Inspiring Futures. I was kind of hoping it would help me get my life back on track. So I was thinking Inspiring Futures would be a good way to get back to at least doing something that I cared about doing... And help me get some of my confidence back. One problem is that I’m exceptionally shy, and… I just failed at speaking to people a lot of the time. Having done the programme, I’m better at communicating than I first thought. For a long time I’ve been extremely unconfident in my ability. It was good to meet people… it’s been great because we’ve been able to meet people who we wouldn’t necessarily have met otherwise. People outside of who we normally talk to...from a very different background than me. Wouldn’t normally have spoken to them, but met them through the programme, and they’re nice! ... [Now] I’m feeling that I’ve got a lot of myself back, thanks to this, because for a long time I was just extremely confused and a bit lost. A lot of my friends are saying that I’m like I was before – because for a long time I was quite gloomy, quite temperamental, quite difficult to be around.. My parents are just completely astounded … They’re just really really happy. It’s worth everything, really. I’m going to say that being able to do the course and go to the Costume Gallery and what I’ve got out of this ... probably feels about as good as when I was given the one year’s all clear. It actually feels that good to me, [mentally and emotionally]. It’s completely changed my life. It’s made me more confident for the future, now I’ve got a good reference from the Costume Gallery...where I was helping to organise things, [helping] in the archives, greeting visitors, and helping to store the collection! Some of the oldest things we’ve got there are from the 1600s. I should be able to move into the sort of field that I’m interested in, which is probably Costume, Costuming, or museums. And I’ve I applied for a job the other day ... and I’ve been looking at universities, either Conservation or Fashion Design"
8. SROI stage 4 - Establishing 'impact' ‘Impact’ is a measure of the difference that a project, organisation or programme has made. In this SROI analysis, impact is measured for different stakeholders’ outcomes, compared with the likely level of that outcome in the absence of the project (known as counter-factual or deadweight), and taking into account the contribution of other factors (known as attribution), and any displacement (where an outcome comes at the expense of another outcome, for example if an employment programme leads to some people getting jobs at the expense of other people). It is similar to the concept of ‘additionality’ discussed by HM Treasury in the Green Book. This SROI analysis measures these adjustments by triangulating a number of different primary data i.e survey and interviews, and secondary research elements to help establish impact credibly. In summary these are as follows: Attribution: In terms of scaling, a 5 point scale for level of attribution agreement was used (None of it, A little of it, Some of it, Most of it, All of it) for different outcomes categories, and stakeholder responses were converted to 0-1 scale (0-100%), as follows for the categories: - Skills and attainment 0.72 - Employability and volunteering 0.76 - Health and wellbeing 0.76 - Further education 0.6 - Employed work 0.6 - Venues outcomes 0.5 split between if and the volunteer (except for saved training costs, attribution score of 1) - Local authority outcomes 0.6 - Government outcomes i.e. JSA, health care costs, economic contribution 0.5 split between if and the volunteer - Family outcomes 0.5 split between if and the volunteer Deadweight: The majority of respondents reported that it was highly unlikely that these outcomes would have occurred anyway on an alternative course, or that alternative forms of museum or heritagebased training for volunteering were openly available to the respondents. We have used a 20% deadweight / counter-factual rate to further reduce the amount of impact claimed. Displacement factor ranges from 8%-17%, based on HCA guidance for training and education for city area, and we have assumed the if project not significantly reduce existing activity from within (or outside) the target group or area. There are however one or two cases where a volunteer with previous volunteering relationship with lead venue was selected, which raises a question about whether that place would have been better utilised by an alternative participant with higher needs. We feel this can be included in, and is reflected by the displacement rate outlined above. Drop-off of impact and Discount rates are not yet included until year 2 data has been collected. Benefit periods will be explored further during longitudinal study over the upcoming next 2 years, as will therefore the related drop off rates for any longer term impact. All the above considerations will be reviewed longitudinally over the evaluation timeframe.
9. SROI stage 5 - Calculating provisional social value to date This report has drawn on the magnitude of change identified across key outcomes, as collected from volunteer and venue surveys, and measured with proxy values identified that are attached to those changes. As a result, a summary of the estimated worth of outcomes achieved in the first year of the if project is presented in Table 8 below. This may be reviewed and re-calculated as the ongoing data collection plan progresses into the second year of the project. Table 8. SROI values per stakeholder outcome category year 1 benefit period only Attributed value of outcomes Stakeholder Outcomes generated Well-being outcomes £85,800 Continued Volunteering £15,500 75 Volunteers Skills & Attainment £42,900 Entering Further education £29,000 Entering Employment £35,000 Other Employability outcomes £34,000 TOTAL year 1 benefit period £242,200 The State Avoided JSA cost £14,000 Reduced NHS need for mental £1,500-£2,000 health / depression Economic contribution Income £500 (min wage) Tax & NI from employment TOTAL year 1 benefit period £16,000 Local Authority Adult Social Avoided Adult Social Care cost £1,100 Care (slightly reduced need and avoided risk) Venues
Volunteering hours direct value (min wage at half attribution) Continued volunteering hours Training cost value to venues Improved practice through partnership learning Improved visitor access to collection from recommendations (e.g. influence of handling tables, interactions) TOTAL year 1 benefit period Improved wellbeing TOTAL ATTRIBUTED VALUE
£2,900 £11,900 £2,200 £1,200 circa £1,500
£19,200 £7,000 Estimated £278,500
The majority of the benefits rightly accrue to the volunteers. Benefits exclude the value created for the training provider, which is treated in the model as an input measure. However this will increase slightly when upcoming research regarding impacts on visitors and communities is completed, and longitudinal data becomes available about volunteer destinations. For example at least 5 more participants from the first intake have entered work and this is likely to increase the first year value generated and attributed to around £310,000. A full table of outcomes and proxy values and calculations are provided in the Appendices.
10. Learning, improvement and ongoing evaluation From the evaluation, a number of observations can be stated with regards to the general learning and approach of the project delivery model. In summary, these include: Co-ordinators' commitment and community of improvement and good practice: if co-ordinating team provide a wealth of experience and openness to continuous improvement, including - Refining training content - Improving partnership working amongst venues - Inclusive planning and evaluation, bringing in different viewpoints from other venues and partners in how the project is delivered and reviews - Sharing learning best practice - Volunteers as part of the evaluation and experiencing facilitation skills Furthermore, the Cultural Volunteer Co-ordinators Forum (CVCF) is a group of volunteer co-ordinators from cultural organisations across Greater Manchester. The group meet bimonthly to share good practice, attend volunteer management training and develop resources to support cultural volunteer involving organisations. During the project the group ensure that learning from if: Volunteering for wellbeing is well disseminated and contributes to a good practice guide on the project website www.volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk.
There are also potential areas to maintain, and improve: - Diversity - the project needs to bring on more participants from under-represented target groups - Working practices between partners - the project was slow in increasing the frequency of direct group or sub-group contact, but the CVCF platform has helped to facilitate and improve this significantly - however more informal visitation, feedback and contact time should be maintained to foster this community. - Supporting through transitions - in a small limited number of cases to ensure that some participants with high anxiety or severely low coping mechanisms are comfortable and clear on how to manage their own transition from being in a group to being alone and autonomous in their role - Clearer selection criteria - if not already done so, we recommend this needs to be documented and readily available for all stakeholders and for the benefit of current and future projects across the sector. Further note: With regards to ongoing data collection and SROI evaluation for Year 2 - the benefit periods beyond year 1 are likely to change the results in this report. There will be some challenges in securing feedback further into the future - a number of the exiting volunteers may be disengaged from the project 12-18 months from now. However our initial surveys have recorded contact details of the majority of respondents. Accessing visitors and people in the local community may be the hardest to arrange, and we will sense check and plan logistics and permission with each of the respective venues to ensure that there are no unintended consequences of the work taking place. Year 2 data may allow us to differentiate values for volunteer types: e.g. mental health, over 50s, unemployed, ex-military.
11. Interim conclusion and recommendations In its first year, Inspiring Futures: Volunteering for Wellbeing (if) is achieving dramatic improvements in participants' state of mental and emotional wellbeing, across a diverse range of abilities and challenging personal circumstances. Further outcomes for many participants are emerging, around continued volunteering, entering further education, employability and gaining work, as well as positive attitudinal change towards opportunities for socialising and project participation in heritage. This project is preventing and breaking vicious cycles of low self-belief, isolation, exclusion, demotivation, depression and rejection for many participants. Heritage and arts venues can be sustainable key partners in generating improved wellbeing and life satisfaction for people. DCMS' analysis for Quantifying and Valuing the Wellbeing impacts of sport and culture, estimates that culture/arts engagement can bring about life satisfaction improvements worth £1,084 per person per year. English Heritage estimates £1,646 as the wellbeing value of heritage engagement or visiting historic sites through the year. This does seem a broad range, and depends on the methodology of valuation. However, there is some similarity with this report's analysis of wellbeing improvement achieved so far through heritage volunteering, which estimates the value of volunteering for wellbeing to be in the range of £1,130, up to around £1,500 if bringing forward the value of forecasted future impacts i.e. some outcomes have longer benefit periods. Improving the scale of change in outcomes will increase this value. EH and HLF have also commissioned studies and evaluations demonstrating that individuals gain through engagement with heritage, particularly from enjoyment, a sense of fulfillment, and enrichment, the development of new skills and improved physical and mental health. Wellbeing is an overarching policy objective further set out by the Parliamentary paper, Wellbeing in Four Policy areas (2014), which combines economic and non-economic aims. Through this document policy makers recognise that experiencing and participating in arts and culture has demonstrable positive impacts on wellbeing, and it is recommended that links between the arts and culture and health, central government (DCMS, the Department of Health and the Department for Communities and Local Government) should work with relevant arts agencies to join up better, and maximise the wellbeing benefit from available budgets. Local authorities should also consider how cultural commissioning might contribute to priorities identified in their Health and Wellbeing Strategies. This challenge must be at the forefront for local authorities who are now also tasked with responsibilities under The Health and Social Care Act 2012, for improving the health and wellbeing of their local populations. if is achieving this through encompassing its core values throughout its delivery and also in its process of evaluation and reflection, in terms of: ◦ Being highly collaborative, co-operative, consultative ◦ Being aspirational, ambitious, innovative and committed to reflective learning ◦
Aiming to generate a sense of fairness, transparency and equality
Key success factors of this life-changing project include:
Fostering a sense of connection, enrichment and contribution to and from other people and their stories, which appears to be a key differentiator of heritage volunteering. Participants develop a strong connectedness to events and human experience across time. This is enhancing levels of selfawareness, belonging, imagination and ability to narrate and relate better to others, and thus improve social relationships, as well as mental and emotional capital. Stimulating training components unlocking participants' creative and communicative capabilities of storytelling, bringing objects to life and inspiring visitors' imaginations, thus significantly enhancing visitor experience and collection interpretation
The setting of Museums and galleries as both stimulating and reflective spaces: offers a potential pathway to enhanced mental, cognitive and emotional capital
Training components that are experiential and participatory carried out specifically in the museum or gallery environment, (not just classroom-based). In particular tours, behind the scenes exploration, volunteer buddying, object handling and presentation skills
Interactive and interpersonal nature of the training and placement: equipping participants to interact socially with, and make a difference to, visitors, venue staff and other volunteers
Trainers who develop a safe and non-judgmental learning environment, and are able to encourage participants to support each other and be willing to make allowances for colleagues where needed e.g. recognising people learn at a different pace and style
Dedicated Volunteer Co-ordinators who are committed to testing and improving good practices and solutions in their venue, and fostering support for wellbeing in the workplace
Developing a community and platform to unlock good practice, knowledge transfer and support between multiple venues - creating a cluster effect
An effective recruitment process working with key local partner agencies who can target hard to reach individuals or those with challenging personal circumstances
Project co-ordinators who lead on and encourage collaboration between partner venues; are committed to continuous improvement through learning and feedback, and refine the delivery model where needed.
Whilst the key strengths above should be sustained and seen as highly encouraging signs of a well designed project - the if team does need the ability and experience to select specific individuals with clear defined needs of a target group. If not already circulated, it would be helpful to the community of coordinators to share if or how this selection process can be a template to optimise their own practice of broadening diversity and inclusion in volunteer recruitment and networking. This selection criteria makes the project highly fit for purpose. Our recommendations for improvement after having analysed the first year of activity are summarised as follows: 1. Building the range of referrers related to target groups in order to broaden reach - for example set up several new relationships, for example for referring from housing associations or social landlords, and promotion through local public health bodies who are looking at community and social capitalbased solutions to isolation, especially amongst over 50s. The findings of this first annual report should be used to demonstrate to new referrers the social value, citizenship and scale of wellbeing impact if can generate for their stakeholder group or service users. The project should especially approach Community Managers and Resident/Tenant Liaison officers of local housing providers and invite their input and attendance at key museum events or group meetings/presentations. Our Life and Envoy can be a key partner in arranging introductions and supporting this effort across Manchester, as they work closely with several housing providers in the area, such as St Vincent's or Trafford Housing. 2. Continue improving reach and target group representation - this is linked to building the range of referrers, and also promoting the project through its graduate volunteers and their peer groups (which we believe has started to happen already). In addition to the good support and partnership working from existing referrer network, the if team could approach local BME (Black Minority Ethnic) Networks focused on health inequalities such as Manchester BME Network, and local business connectors in the Manchester area (such as Business In the Community) who are working to bring together partnerships between youth unemployment agencies, ex-military service personnel,
agencies and opportunities for fulfilling activities - or even provide support to the project in terms of resource and/or operational expertise. 3. Ensure compliance and closer fit across performance criteria for the training provider - if it is not already in place, if team should consider creating a simple KPI rating or checklist with which to assess the effectiveness of the training provider. We are aware that improvements will have been made going forward and therefore it would be helpful for performance management purposes to update a KPI list. Some of the key factors for success in this report could form a small number of those KPIs. 4. Consider some participants might need help to manage their own transition from being in the relative safety of a group and going into placement role. This should only be for a small minority who may be particularly anxious, and might for example require both more informal one-to-one advice and encouragement from graduate volunteers, observing other volunteers in action, and bringing graduate volunteers into relevant training classes or events that participants are attending to discuss how to tackle the first week. 5. Sustain practice improvements, formal and informal communication, and knowledge transfer amongst and between partner venues - especially revitalising the process with Whitworth Gallery (was in refurbishment) and Ordsall Hall (capacity issues).
6. The evaluation effort and project will benefit from ensuring tracking and sustained informal engagement e.g. newsletters of if volunteer alumni, and we will aim to produce this off the back of this report.
This report's findings and recommendations forms the foundation for progressing and collaborating in the coming year's evaluation activities. This exciting and important ongoing body of work will focus on further evidencing the magnitude and social and economic of long term change being achieved for participants, broader stakeholders and public policy objectives. The full second year report will be released in approximately 12 months time.
"My mum has said this is the best thing I've done in 10 years, its helped more than anything else I've tried... without this programme I'd still be sitting at home, even more depressed, stuck in a rut, getting panicky. I would struggle to find support for this type of training or placement, nothing out there that would help us much as this has"
Appendix A: Methodological note The methodology followed in the report draws on the UK Cabinet Office’s Guide to Social Return on Investment.2 Social Return on Investment (SROI) is a form of adjusted cost-benefit analysis that can quantify the value of social, environmental and economic outcomes that result from an organisation’s activities. It aims to move beyond simple metrics and measures the “full-life” impact and value-formoney of an investment. An SROI analysis proceeds via:
Establishing scope Identifying material stakeholders Stakeholder engagement to understand the “theory of change” and mapping of outcomes (Impact Value Map) Outcomes data collection and providing values Establishing impact SROI model development and financial calculations finally Reporting
Findings are based on extensive research into outcomes and scale of change as informed by customers and stakeholder surveys and interviews; and alongside tried and tested valuation methods drawing on unit cost savings at government level, and healthcare economics for valuing wellbeing outcomes (in particular using assigned proportions of a Quality Adjusted Life Year, or QALY, as defined by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence and the Centre for Mental Health, and well-being domains within National Account of Well-being by nef, 2009).
A guide to Social Return on Investment, (2009), nef/Cabinet Office.
Appendix B. List of proxy values and underlying estimates Stakeholder
Proportion/ Magnitude of change 0-1 scale
Overall Wellbeing / Vitality
Resilience / self reliance
Self efficacy / self belief
Sense of purpose / independence
Sense of belonging
Improved communication/ presentation skills for
NB proxy values are reduced to reflect proportion of magnitude of outcome change
Assigned proportion of a QALY value for overall mental & emotional well-being (under personal wellbeing) Assigned proportion of a QALY value for other non-family social relationships (under social well-being) Assigned proportion of a QALY value for resilience and confidence (under personal well-being) Assigned proportion of a QALY value for resilience and confidence (under personal well-being) Assigned proportion of a QALY value for independence (under personal well-being)
QALYs are publicly validated and used by governments and academics as a threshold measure to value the worth of achieving one extra year of improved quality of health and life; also reflects how our mental and emotional well-being is valued, without resorting to market traded prices
QALYs are publicly validated and used by governments and academics as a threshold measure to value the worth of achieving one extra year of improved quality of health and life; also reflects how our mental and emotional well-being is valued, without resorting to market traded prices
QALYs are publicly validated and used by governments and academics as a threshold measure to value the worth of achieving one extra year of improved quality of health and life; also reflects how our mental and emotional well-being is valued, without resorting to market traded prices
Assigned proportion of a QALY value for sense of belonging and identity (under social well-being) Employability skills course
Reflective of the value in attaining effective work presentation skills
workplace Further volunteering
Paid work FTE
Improved attainment level i.e. in further training or education
Transferring knowledge to others
Sense of direction/control about work
Retaining skills attractive for other organisations/ / companies Entering Further Education at post-grad level
Value to individual of volunteering
Minimum wage salary as conservative estimate 50% of college education salary differential. Different to proxy for general Life Skills OR Accredited Qualifications outside of college equivalent Cost of paying for a technical museum training school skills programme, including some travel cost
Stated preference value to individual based on function of income and household behaviours (i.e. willingness to pay/forego/time), 25-49 yrs range as mid-point, "Regular attendance" London Reflects value of financial gain accepted from salaried work (conservative)
Provides an indication of value to the individual in terms of likely future salary differential
Provides an indication of value to the individual in terms of what they are likely to pay to attain a related technical accreditation
Assigned proportion of a QALY value for autonomy and control (under personal wellbeing) Reduced likelihood of wage penalty for 3 years
Value to the individual of not losing skills through non-productive longterm unemployment, relevant for the labour market
Differential amount in future wages: degree vs non degree holder
Provides an indication of value to the individual in terms of likely future salary differential from holding
66 graduate degree level qualification Families
Government & Public services
5 particip ants (judgm ent based on intervie ws and survey respon ses about severe depres sion) TBC
Reduced Adult social care need from Mental Heath and isolation issues
12 particip ants with reporte d improv ement 10 (using
Overall Wellbeing / Vitality (excluding number avoiding diabetes for doublecounting reasons) Improved relationships with family
Assigned proportion of a QALY value for overall mental & emotional well-being (under personal wellbeing)
Proportion of a QALY value for personal family relationships (under social wellbeing) Average weekly hour visit cost of social worker support for 3 months
Evidence of direct cost to local authority, NB assumption of 3 month programme of hour per week visitation was thought to be reasonable for those at risk of moving from Level 2 to Level 3 severity
Improved cultural offer Overall improved health from reduced depression need
NHS spend per person on package of mental health admission, one case of community based contact and one case of outpatient treatment
Evidence of direct cost to the state, NB assumption that long-term care is not an appropriate outcome for movement from Level 2 to Level 3 severity
Individual Income tax &
Calculation using government tax and
Evidence of direct cost
Social Landlord (NB not included in final calculation, but described here for future posterity) Venues
survey proport ion and destina tion) 10 (using survey proport ion and destina tion data) TBC
National Insurance on minimum wage
Reduced Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) including future Unemployment penalty
Annual cost of weekly JSA claim (over 25 years old)
Direct unit cost to government (Excluding administration cost)
Cost to public authority of tenancy failure, as a function of reported well-being change
Reflects direct cost to the State of eviction and tenancy failure
Value to venue of hiring time at minimum wage
Hourly rate minimum wage (multiplied by total number of hours in model)
Value to venue of hiring time at minimum wage
Hourly rate minimum wage (multiplied by total number of hours in model)
Cost of training reported by venues providing training anyway
Direct cost saving - weak indicator, only 2 venues
Volunteering hours direct value at minimum wage Continued volunteering hours for one year (average reported by venues) Training course cost value per person at venue paying for training anyway Increased visitor access to collection
Number of visitors newly reached, using rate of visitor flow per hour to new volunteers. NB this is combined with the
Conservative estimate of average spend per visitor across all venues
Improved practices through partnership
national 30% proportion of visits to a museum as a result of recommendation from friends Volunteer management 9 course series for coordinators
Direct short-term cost to venue of improving volunteer management capabilities for co-ordinators
Appendix C: Volunteer Surveys / Venue Surveys Volunteer Survey Many thanks for taking the time to complete this survey. Volunteers' collective views have helped design these questions, based on the most common outcomes that some of you identified and shared with the Envoy team. The survey will ask you to compare between how things are now and then before hearing about the if: volunteering for well-being programme. We are conducting this survey on behalf of IWM North, Manchester Museum, MOSI and partner venues. The survey is designed to help museums, other volunteers and local people understand your experiences as participants who have been trained and are completing your placements. Participation in the survey is voluntary. If you choose to take part, you may still choose not to answer all the questions. Please be as honest as you can, whether it is good or bad feedback. This will help to improve the programme for future people like you. Envoy Partnership will share the results of this survey with other volunteers and the museums, but your answers will be treated anonymously. Your answers will never be attributed without your permission. If you would like us to clarify anything about these questions, please contact: Andy (email@example.com) or Danielle Garcia (firstname.lastname@example.org / 01618364080) Your completed survey can also be posted to Envoy, 1 Alfred Place, 2nd floor, London WC1E 7EB, or handed in to the volunteering manager at your training venue.
1. What is your name?
2. Which venue are you at for your placement?
3. What are the tasks that you do on your placement?
4. Roughly how many hours are you able to volunteer per week on your placement?
5A. The following statements are about your general Skills, Knowledge and Attainment that may have resulted from the if: volunteering programme.
For each statement, tick in a box where you would rate your level of agreement NOW: SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE & ATTAINMENT Strongly Agree a Neither Disagree a Strongly Don't know Agree Agree or disagree
I have opportunities to show how capable I am I have strong communication and presentation skills In general, I feel confident to achieve good marks on educational classes or training programmes I attend I have good awareness about how to fulfil the roles of a heritage volunteer When I visit heritage venues or galleries, I can think about answers to some of the their day-to-day problems (for example, risk to collections, helping visitors)
5B. The same statements are below about your general Skills and Knowledge. Please think about the few weeks just before hearing about the if: volunteering programme. Tick where you would have rated your level of agreement BEFORE hearing about if: SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE & ATTAINMENT Strongly Agree a Neither Disagree a Strongly Don't know Agree Agree or disagree
I had opportunities to show how capable I am I had strong communication and presentation skills In general, I felt confident to achieve good marks on educational classes or training programmes I attended I had good awareness about how to fulfil the roles of a heritage volunteer When I visited heritage venues or galleries, I could think about answers to some of the the day-to-day problems (for example, risk to collections, helping visitors)
6. Please think about the change between NOW and BEFORE - if any - that you identified above. Roughly how much of this change do you think is because of the if: volunteering programme? (Bear in mind the effect of other things in your life, for example family, friends, other advisors) All of it
Most of it
Some of it
A little of it
None of it
7. Roughly how long do you think the difference you indicated above - if any - might last for you? (Please tick):
☐ One week ☐ One month ☐ 3-6 months ☐ A year
☐ 2-3 years ☐ More than 3 years ☐ Don't know ☐ Other (please describe)
8. If you have any additional comments on your general levels of Skills, Knowledge and Attainment that may have resulted from the programme please write them below:
9A. The following statements are about your general level of Life Satisfaction and Wellbeing that may have resulted from the if: volunteering programme. Tick in a box to rate how often you feel each statement happens for you NOW: PERSONAL & SOCIAL WELL-BEING
NOW I feel optimistic about the future Overall, I feel satisfied about my life I feel the things I do in my life are worthwhile I feel confident in myself I feel close to other people (e.g. not feeling isolated or lonely) I deal with problems well I feel I belong to part of a community I feel I can do the things I really enjoy
All of the time
Some of the time
None of the time
9B. The same statements are below about your general Life Satisfaction and Well-being Please think about the few weeks just before hearing about the if: volunteering programme. Tick in a box to rate how often you feel each statement happened BEFORE hearing about if: PERSONAL & SOCIAL WELL-BEING
All of the time
Some of the time
None of the time
I felt optimistic about the future Overall, I felt satisfied about my life I felt the things I do in my life are worthwhile I felt confident in myself I felt close to other people (e.g. not feeling isolated or lonely) I dealt with problems well I felt I belong to part of a community I felt I could do the things I really enjoy
10. Please think about the change between NOW and BEFORE - if any - that you identified above. Roughly how much of this change do you think is because of the if: volunteering programme? (Bear in mind the effect of other things in your life, for example family, friends, other advisors) All of it
Most of it
Some of it
A little of it
None of it
11. Roughly how long do you think the difference you indicated above - if any - might last for you? (Please tick): ☐ One week ☐ 2-3 years
☐ One month ☐ 3-6 months ☐ A year
☐ More than 3 years ☐ Don't know ☐ Other (please describe
12. If you have any additional comments on your general level of Life Satisfaction and Well-being that may have resulted from the programme please write them below:
13A. The following statements are about your view on general Heritage opportunities.
For each statement, tick in a box where you would rate your level of agreement NOW:
NOW I believe museums and galleries excite people's imagination I encourage people I know to visit museums and galleries Museums and galleries can offer new opportunities or projects In general, understanding heritage opens up my appreciation of other cultures/people I encourage people I know to volunteer in museums and galleries
Agree a little
Neither Strongly Disagree Agree or disagree a little Disagree
13B. The same statements are below about general Heritage opportunities
Please think about the few weeks just before hearing about the if: volunteering programme. Tick where you would have rated your level of agreement BEFORE hearing about if:
Agree a little
Neither Strongly Disagree Agree or disagree a little Disagree
I believed museums and galleries excite people's imagination I encouraged people I know to visit museums and galleries Museums and galleries can offer new opportunities or projects In general, understanding heritage opens up my appreciation of other cultures/people I encouraged people I know to volunteer in museums and galleries
14. Please think about the change between NOW and BEFORE - if any - that you identified above. Roughly how much of this change do you think is because of the if: volunteering programme? (Bear in mind the effect of other things in your life, for example family, friends, other advisors) All of it
Most of it
Some of it
A little of it
None of it
15. Roughly how long do you think the differences you indicated above - if any - might last for you? (Please tick): ☐ One week ☐ 2-3 years
☐ One month ☐ 3-6 months ☐ A year
☐ More than 3 years ☐ Don't know ☐ Other (please describe)
16. If you have any additional comments on Cultural Heritage Opportunities that may have resulted from the programme please write them below:
17A. The following statements are about your view on further Volunteering and Employability
For each statement, tick in a box where you would rate your level of agreement NOW:
VOLUNTEERING & EMPLOYABILITY
NOW I am interested in volunteering more in future, either in museums and galleries or elsewhere I have a good sense of direction about finding the work/roles I would like to do I can effectively promote my skills that are attractive to other organisations / employers I am confident that I will find work opportunities that interest me
Agree a little
Neither Strongly Disagree Agree or disagree a little Disagree
17B. The same statements are below about your view on Volunteering and Employability
Please think about the few weeks just before hearing about the if: volunteering programme.
Tick where you would have rated your level of agreement BEFORE hearing about if: VOLUNTEERING & EMPLOYABILITY
Agree a little
Neither Strongly Disagree Agree or disagree a little Disagree
I was interested in volunteering more in future, either in museums and galleries or elsewhere I had a good sense of direction about finding the work/roles I would like to do I could effectively promote my skills that are attractive to other organisations / employers I was confident that I would find work opportunities that interest me
18. Please think about the change between NOW and BEFORE - if any - that you identified above. Roughly how much of this change do you think is because of the if: volunteering programme? (Bear in mind the effect of other things in your life, for example family, friends, other advisors) All of it
☐ Most of it ☐
Some of it
A little of it
None of it
19. Roughly how long do you think the differences you indicated above - if any - might last for you? (Please tick):
☐ One week ☐ One month ☐ 3-6 months ☐ A year
☐ 2-3 years ☐ More than 3 years ☐ Don't know ☐ Other (please describe)
20. If you have any additional comments on Volunteering and Employability that may have resulted from the programme please write them below:
21. The following questions are about your view on your Placement Venue as a Place of Work. Think about your the venue where you volunteer, and look at the statements below. What is your level of agreement with each statement?
VENUE AS A PLACE OF WORK
Agree a little
Neither Strongly Disagree Agree or disagree a little Disagree
Staff and volunteers work well as a joined-up team Information and feedback is freely given across the organisation The organisation is receptive to new ideas and new ways of doing things I get the right amount of support in my role from staff and managers I get the right amount of support from other volunteers 22. If you have any additional comments on your Placement Venue as a Place of Work please write them below:
23. Thinking about the volunteering you are doing with the programme, do you feel your volunteering has had any impact on your family or friends (for example, they feel happier, or less worried)? Please describe below: Agreement Volunteers
24. Thinking about your life in general, approximately how much volunteering would you be doing now, if the programme had not happened?
25. Please tell us a bit about you : What is your age? What is the postcode you travel from to volunteer?
26. Are you an ex-service person or have you served in the armed forces? (Please tick) ☐ Yes ☐ No 27. How would you describe your ethnic background (please tick): ☐African ☐ Mixed White & Black
☐Caribbean ☐Chinese ☐South Asian (India, Pakistan,Bangladesh) ☐ Asian
☐ Caribbean ☐ Mixed White & Black African ☐White British
☐White (other) ☐ Latin American ☐ Arab ☐ Mixed Asian White Any other group (please describe)
28. Do you receive income support or other support from local services? If so what types? (Please tick): ☐ None
☐ Housing support / social housing tenancy ☐ Job Seekers Allowance ☐ Disability allowance ☐ Carer support/allowance ☐ Child Support ☐ State pension ☐ Other (please describe)
29. Do you receive social support from a local service, e.g. support worker? If so please confirm the type of support and how many hours per week you receive:
30. If you do receive social support, please tell us by how much more or less you think you might need further support AFTER participating in the programme (please tick):
☐ Much less (almost no support needed at all) ☐ A little less (perhaps 1 to 5 hours less a week) ☐ About the same ☐ A little more (perhaps 1 to 5 hours more a week) ☐ Much more (more than one day more per week)
☐ Not Applicable/Don't Know
31. We need to follow up with you, to quickly check on how you are doing in about 6 months from now. You can then tell us how much the programme has made a longer term difference. We would be grateful if you could please share you email and telephone contact (this will be used just for this research, under data protection rules and not shared with anyone else) Email: Telephone:
32. If you have any further comments or thoughts on the questions above, or if you think you need to explain your answer a bit more, then please write them over the page:
if: Volunteering for Wellbeing Survey for Venues Your name Your role Your organisation
Many thanks for taking part in this survey. Envoy Partnership is the independent evaluator of if:Volunteering for Wellbeing programme. Envoy are conducting a Social Return on Investment (SROI) evaluation of the programme. As part of our research process, we would like to hear from all the venues involved in delivering placements for volunteers. We seek to understand the costs and benefits of working with if Volunteers, as well as areas of particular successes and /or areas to improve and refine. This survey is based on the most common material outcomes for venues, identified during telephone and face-to-face interviews with Gaby Porter earlier this year.
Your responses will be anonymised, and we will not attribute your comments without your permission. Information you provide will be held under our confidentiality undertaking with IWM North. If you have any questions or concerns at all about this survey, please contact Andy Warby at email@example.com or Danielle Garcia at IWMN at firstname.lastname@example.org
Section 1: if: Volunteer numbers The following questions relate to if volunteers only, unless otherwise stated 1. How many if Volunteers have you taken on so far this year (2014)? 2. Please state for each Role in the table below, how many of them volunteered in the following ways?
Roles Object handling and interpretation Visitor/customer service or Front desk Administration and marketing/PR support Archiving or digitising
Two or more of the above Other (please describe) 3. On average, roughly how many volunteering hours a week does each if volunteer complete during their placement? 4. In general, what is the approximate cost value of volunteering per hour to your organisation? For example, the hourly £ wage rate for a similar worker if you had to hire for equivalent skills. 5. How many if volunteers continue volunteering at your venue after their placement?
6. On average, how much time (hours) OR cost (£) would your organisation have invested in order to recruit a general volunteer? Please answer in either Cost or Time
Section 2: if Volunteers in Action The following questions relate to if volunteers only, unless otherwise stated. This section should be completed by the person who trained the volunteer.
7. On a scale of 0-10, where 0 is the worst score and 10 is the best score, overall where would you rate the volunteers' self-confidence at the very start of their placement?
Scores out of 10
8. Where would you rate the volunteers' self-confidence on the 0-10 scale, at the end of the placement? 9. On a scale of 0-10, where would you rate the quality of service the volunteers provided at the very start of their placement? 10. Where would you rate their quality of service provided at the end of the placement?
11. On a scale of 0-10, where would you rate the volunteers skills levels at the very start of their placement? 12. Where would you rate their skills levels at the end of the placement?
13. If you have any comments you would like to share about your organisation's
experience of the if volunteer/s during their placement with you, please write them here:
14. Did the if volunteer/s let you know how they felt on placement? If yes, please describe what they said below:
15. Participants complete a 10 week course prior to their placement. In terms of relevance and competence of skills, how would you rate the quality of training the volunteers received to perform in their role/s? Excellent ☐
Very Good ☐
Poor ☐ Extremely Poor☐
16. Thinking of your visitors and their experience of your venue's, please describe how you would you rate the visitor experience as a result of interacting with if volunteers? Would this be any different in the case of visitor interaction with your other existing volunteers?
17. Please look at the statements below. Please tick in a box where you would rate your level of agreement about your experience of if volunteers Strongly Agree
Agree a little
Neither Strongly Disagree Agree or disagree a little Disagree
if volunteers become strong advocates in the local area for promoting our venue if volunteers are effective at providing heritage knowledge transfer to our visitors Our venue has broadened our reach to new visitors as a result of having if volunteers on placement if volunteers have brought in new visitors (e.g. family, friends, people from the local area) if volunteers feel integrated in diverse histories and traditions Our existing volunteers have benefited from interacting with if volunteers
18. Please indicate how many other Volunteers you would have been able to recruit instead if the if volunteering programme was not available? How do you recruit your volunteers otherwise?
Section 3: Volunteer recruitment & management This section seeks to compare your experience of working with if volunteers to other volunteers you might ordinarily recruit.
19. Please think about any other volunteers that you recruit or might recruit, without the if programme. Would you pay for other volunteers' training?
YES / NO
20. If yes, i) How much would this cost your organisation per volunteer? AND ii) How much time would it take your staff to arrange?
21. i) What is the hourly ÂŁ rate of a member of staff who supports or coordinates the if volunteer/s? (Please answer in ÂŁ per hour) ii) Roughly how much staff time is spent supporting or training the if volunteer/s? (Please answer in Hours per week)
AND ii) Is this different for any other volunteer? If yes, please describe below how much less or more different?
22. Please look at the statements below. Please tick in a box where you would rate your level of agreement about your experience of these outcomes and whether they have resulted from the if programme Strongly Neither Strongly Agree a Disagre Agree Agree or disagree little e a little Disagree We always have processes in place to ensure if volunteers are well integrated into our organisation and with staff As a result of the if programme, we have a more diverse workforce that is reflective of our communities, compared to before We receive appropriate support and information from the if team at all times, regarding what to expect and how to manage the new if volunteers if volunteers have resulted in improving our capacity to operate and develop the venue Our staff and management have gained experience to be more confident in managing volunteers with diverse needs and backgrounds We are getting added value from the working in partnership with the if: Volunteering for wellbeing programme e.g. working and learning together with other local venues about volunteering for well-being best practice Working with if volunteers has led to changes in how we design, refresh or manage our interpretation and/or collection
23. Please let us know if you have changed anything about how your organisation operates, thinks about or manages volunteers and/or well-being as a result of the if:Volunteering for wellbeing programme. ?
24. Have you had any specific challenges or outcomes from this experience? Please describe below.
25. Please describe below if there are any other benefits of working with if:Volunteering for wellbeing for your venue that we might have missed:
Section 4: Costs of volunteers in general, at your organisation The questions on this page are about your venue's costs of recruiting Volunteers in general. 27. How many months on average, do most other volunteers volunteer for? 28. On average, how much is a volunteer paid monthly for travel expenses (if at all)? 29. If you have the available information, please can you describe what other costs per volunteer your organisation associates with volunteers? This might include normal overheads, costs of equipment and specialist clothing/uniforms, lunch etc.
If you have any other comments on the questions, or you think it would be helpful to explain how you arrived at your assumptions, or if you need to caveat your answers at all, then please do so here. That completes the survey. Many thanks for your time.
Appendix D: Valuing wellbeing combining NICE QALYs, National Accounts of Wellbeing/Government Foresight definition and Centre for Mental Health QALY proportion for mental health. Well-being in this evaluation is broadly underpinned by the UK Government Office Science definition, from the Foresight report “Mental Capital and Well-being” 2008), and drawn on by the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), especially for wellbeing guidance for productive workplaces (2009): ‘... a dynamic state in which the individual is able to develop their potential, work productively and creatively, build strong and positive relationships with others, and contribute to their community.’ This allows a valuation of overall mental and emotional wellbeing that would be consistent with using the NICE cost–effectiveness threshold for one full QALY (£30,000). The proportion of one QALY assigned to mental and emotional wellbeing, derived from research by the Centre for Mental Health into the average loss of mental health status - is estimated at 0.352 of a QALY or £10,560. This is a value for those moving into level 3 (mid-level severity) of mental and emotional wellbeing (as defined by the Centre for Mental Health). The National Accounts of Wellbeing components form a proportioned part of mental health QALY.
Appendix E: Adjustment Accounting for Impact, informed by primary data from survey and interviews This SROI analysis measures these adjustments by triangulating a number of different primary i.e survey and interviews, and secondary research elements to help establish impact credibly, specifically: Attribution: In terms of scaling, a 5 point scale for level of attribution agreement was used (None of it, A little of it, Some of it, Most of it, All of it) for different outcomes categories, and stakeholder responses were converted to 0-1 scale (0-100%), as follows for the categories: - Skills and attainment 0.72 - Employability and volunteering 0.76 - Health and wellbeing 0.76 - Further education 0.6 - Employed work 0.6 - Venues outcomes 0.5 split between if and the volunteer (except for saved training costs, attribution score of 1) - Local authority outcomes 0.6 - Government outcomes i.e. JSA, health care costs, economic contribution 0.5 split between if and the volunteer - Family outcomes 0.5 split between if and the volunteer Deadweight: The majority of respondents reported that it was highly unlikely that these outcomes would have occurred anyway on an alternative course, or that alternative forms of museum or heritage-based training for volunteering were openly available to the. We have used a 20% deadweight / counter-factual rate to further reduce the amount of impact claimed. Calculations are slightly sensitive to deadweight in this model, for example increasing the deadweight to 30% reduces the provisional SROI without long term benefit period, to approximately £1.90:£1 and doubling to 40% deadweight reduces the SROI to £1.50:£1.
ď‚ˇ Displacement factor ranges from 8%-17%, based on HCA guidance for training and education for city area, and we have assumed the if project not significantly reduce existing activity from within (or outside) the target group or area. There are however one or two cases where a volunteer with previous volunteering relationship with lead venue was selected, which raises a question about whether that place would have been better utilised by an alternative participant with higher needs. We feel this can be included in, and is reflected by the displacement rate outlined above. ď‚ˇ Drop-off of impact and Discount rates are not yet included until year 2 data has been collected. Benefit periods will be explored further during longitudinal study over the upcoming next 2 years, as will therefore the related drop off rates for any longer term impact. All the above considerations will be reviewed longitudinally over the evaluation timeframe. Further adjustments for discounting the future value of money (as an indicator of value) due to inflation, and a discount rate of 3.5% is used in accordance with HM Treasury guidelines. i
See: www.nao.org.uk/sectors/civil_society/successful_commissioning/successful_commissioning/general_principles/value_for_money/vfm_a nd_tsos.aspx iii http://www.esrc.ac.uk/_images/what-works-wellbeing-common-specification_tcm8-32407.pdf iv http://www.esrc.ac.uk/funding-and-guidance/funding-opportunities/32283/what-works-wellbeingcall-for-proposals.aspx v New Economics Foundation (2009), National Accounts of Well-being. www.nationalaccountsofwellbeing.org
Contact Details For more information about if: Volunteering for Wellbeing please get in touch using the details below: Danielle Garcia, Volunteer Programme Manager, IWM North Email: DGarcia@iwm.org.uk Tel: 0161 836 4080 Lee Ashworth, Volunteer Coordinator, Manchester Museum Email: Lee.Ashworth@manchester.ac.uk Tel: 0161 275 2473 Andy Gawin Warby, Senior Partner, Envoy Partnership Email: email@example.com Tel: +44(0)207 55 88 062 Mobile:+44(0)7841 98 7841
if: Volunteering for wellbeing. Year 1 Annual Report 2013-2014. Social Return On Investment evaluation. www.volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk
Published on Jan 26, 2015
if: Volunteering for wellbeing. Year 1 Annual Report 2013-2014. Social Return On Investment evaluation. www.volunteeringforwellbeing.org.uk