Dear colleagues

During 2012-2017 the University of Huddersfield archive service was transformed with just under £2million investment from the Heritage Lottery Fund and the University of Huddersfield.  The project funded new premises in Heritage Quay, plus extensive engagement, participation and collections management programmes.  The service has won a range of external awards during this period including the Times Higher Education Leadership & Management Award for libraries and the Guardian HE award for “buildings that inspire”, as well as obtaining Archive Service Accreditation.

The project evaluation report, which follows HLF’s latest guidance, has just been published at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/34679/ and is freely available to download.  The Executive Summary can be found below.

Best wishes

Sarah

M Sarah Wickham MA MA RMARA AFHEA
University Archivist & Records Manager

 : +44(0)1484 473 935
 : [log in to unmask]
 : www.heritagequay.org

Heritage Quay | University of Huddersfield 
Queensgate | Huddersfield | HD1 3DH
 

Executive summary

This report forms the summative evaluation for the Heritage @ Huddersfield project (R2 delivery project) funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund and University of Huddersfield and running from 2013-2017. Formative evaluation was carried out in 2015 and 2016 which contributed to the development of the project whilst running. The project aimed to create a beacon centre and Service through which the University’s heritage collections would be accessible to everyone. It was anticipated that the project would secure the long term future of the collections through conservation and cataloguing, and enable new ways for audiences to learn from and engage with them. Securing the future of the collections would mean new and wider ways could be developed to engage with audiences and to interpret the collections. 

The project was evaluated against its original aims and objectives, using a range of methods. Its contribution to HLF’s outcomes under its 2008 Strategic Framework (in force at the time of application and during the project) is also evaluated in addition to its contribution to the strategic plans of the University of Huddersfield’s archive service. 

The report considers: 
1. What the project aimed to achieve 
2. What actually happened? – across the detailed work areas of the project: 
2.1 Capital works to repair and conserve the heritage collections 
2.2 Capital works to create the facilities in Heritage Quay 
2.3 Activity Plan – adult and community learning 
2.4 Activity Plan – exploration and group spaces in Heritage Quay 
2.5 Activity Plan – online activity 
2.6 Activity Plan – schools activities 
2.7 Activity Plan – University links 
2.8 Activity Plan – participation, volunteering and events 
2.9 Activity Plan – marketing and communications 
2.10 Activity Plan – resource discovery 
2.11 Activity Plan – training and evaluation 
2.12 Activity Plan – using heritage collections in the research room, overall targets and digital engagement; Customer Service Excellence standards 
2.13 Project Management 
3. Review of outcomes overall for the project, Archive Service and HLF 
4. Sustainability 
5. Summary of lessons learned 
6. Acknowledgements 
Appendix 1 Bibliography 
Appendix 2 Digital dashboard (produced quarterly) 
Appendix 3 Summary evaluation report, Learning & Engagement Officer 
Appendix 4 Detailed evaluation report, Participation & Engagement Officer 

In each of the detailed areas within section 2 the report discusses the overall project outcome to which the area of work contributed, the project activity both intended and actual, the “logic model” underpinning the area of work, the evaluation methods employed and quantitative and qualitative evaluation data, before analysing the success of the project outcomes and the extent to which HLF’s strategic outcomes were fulfilled through the project. Whilst the idea of the logic model pre-dated the project’s evaluation framework, these have been used in this evaluation report to plot the outcomes the project intended to achieve and consider the project inputs, activities and outputs accordingly. 

The report shows that this project was delivered on time and under budget, achieving its overall aims and objectives and exceeding the targets originally set for audience engagement and for preservation of the heritage collections. As a result of investment by HLF and the University, it is now easier for everyone, whatever their level of knowledge, to learn from and engage with the collections in ways that suit them as individuals, families or groups. This is a truly interactive service in which the heritage collections become a catalyst for creativity and a living archive, offering a lively interface between audiences and the academic community. Exciting, enticing and flexible multi - functional physical and digital facilities for learning and engagement have been created, which underpin the above areas of work. And radical improvements have been made in the conservation and management of the heritage collections so that they have a sustainable future. 

External consultancy was commissioned to create an evaluation framework for the project in 2014/5. This final report has been compiled by the Project Director who recognises the inherent tension within self-evaluation between a project telling its own story to an external audience, whilst also avoiding bias. This report is therefore aimed to be a document which evaluates the project objectively and identifies openly where things did not go well and could be improved in the future. In the detailed sections it describes an evaluation process which encompassed pre-planning based on the externally commissioned evaluation framework, and triangulation of quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods and data. Input was pro-actively sought from all user groups and consideration of sample sizes and areas of bias. The project aimed to use appropriate and methodical ways of asking to provide robust evidence including coverage of well-being as well as demographic, economic and social capital issues where appropriate. The series of external awards won by the project and service provides a level of independent external challenge. So whilst some subjectivity is inevitable, the report aims to be as objective as possible throughout in evaluating the project. Many people have contributed to the project and to the report; any omissions, errors or subjectivity remaining are entirely those of the author.

Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]

For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra