Why when I approached the HLF about putting our SMR onto the web did they
tell me not even to bother applying?
How does everyone else manage it?
John
----------------------------------------------------------
John Wood
Senior Archaeologist
Planning and Development Service
The Highland Council
Glenurquhart Road
Inverness IV3 5NX
Tel: 01463 702502 Fax: 01463 702298
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: < http://www.higharch.demon.co.uk <http://www.higharch.demon.co.uk/> >
This Email (and any attachment) is intended for the exclusive use of the
addressee(s) only. You should not disclose its contents to any other person.
If you receive this message in error, please contact the sender and delete
the message. Thank you
Opinions expressed herein are my own and do not necessarily represent those
of my employer.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Sydes [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 11 June 2001 14:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: HLF Session at the SMRUG Meeting
As one local authority considering putting a bid in to HLF I have clearly
been misinformed via a source in HLF that there is no need to over
complicate the project proposal - short, sweet and focused is how it was
represented. The very useful detail presented below has confirmed this is
not the case. HLF are looking for one of those wordy and time consuming
documents that the constraints of local government do not allow us to
produce and are probably the one single cause why decisions take so long to
be ratified.
How many words does it really take to quote the recent Mori poll, give a
detailed breakdown of the cost of a web browser and a commitment to carry
out a user survey and a monitoring procedure! What could be simpler?
The HLF may feel it is important to research local circumstances and see
public money being spent district by district reinventing the wheel and
confirming what we already know but personally I would rather see that money
spent on ensuring people receive quality information through whatever medium
seems appropriate - or new hospital beds!
Simplicity I suppose is really a sign that one has not thought out the
project sufficiently, has no grasp of the finer points of project management
and no real interest in securing £100,000 for ones beleaguered and under
resourced SMR. And this from someone who has always 'championed' the use of
MAP2 as a mechanism for archaeological proposals. There has to be a better
way of achieving what is after all a national objective equally good in
Cornwall as Northumberland.
Please tell me that I am wrong and my original source was quite right. Time
is very precious to me and if I write a project proposal I do not want it
returned because I have failed to consider the banal, the superfluous and
the irrelevant!
I don't often rant (these days Jim!)but I am increasingly frustrated about
this issue, after all the money is 'guaranteed' is it not? And we do have
"Unlocking the Past" as Martin points out...
1) Points of concern raised by HLF and EH resulting from comments given back
to SMRs
Market Research/Consultation
SMRs need to consider the following questions. Each SMR should develop this
area based on its own situation/location. The market research can be
developed/refined as part of the project. A plan for user participation
should be included in the overall plan.
* Who should be consulted?
* Who are the current user groups?
* Who are the potential users and how can they be reached (just
putting information on the web is not developing new audiences)?
* Which age groups are being targeted?
* What is the level of information required for the
audience/audiences?
* How will users wish to access information?
* How will users be involved in the project/piloting?
* How will the project address current barriers to access?
Project Management
The following is a checklist for the development of the project design and
the framework for project management:
* Clearly identified aims and objectives (eg placing information on
the web is a means of delivering access rather than an objective in its own
right, the objective can be improving access/developing new audiences etc).
* Identifiable deliverables/outcomes
* Clear methodology for achieving objectives
* Soundly based estimates of resources required
* Constraints and dependencies
* Timetable
* Start Date
* End Date
* Tasks and who is responsible
* Tasks which inter-relate
* Milestones (monitoring points and group meetings)
* Management methodology, eg PRINCE 2
* Management structure, eg Project Board/Steering Group, Project
Manager, Project Team, User Group
* Roles and responsibilities (individuals, eg Project Manager, and
groups, User Group)
* Quality control mechanisms, eg approval of deliverables by User
Group, formal acceptance of deliverables by Project Board
* Risks and risk management, ie factors which may have a negative
impact on the delivery of parts, or all, of the project and how these will
be managed
Evaluating Success
It is very important to think about how you will know if the project is
successful. Think about the following:
* Current situation
* What methods of evaluation you will use to measure success
* Use of evaluation groups to provide feedback
Marketing and Outreach
It is important to provide details of how you intend to market the project
and its outcomes and any associated outreach activities.
* Who should be targeted?
* What methods should be used, eg workshops, exhibitions, leaflets etc
* What information should be included in any promotion material such
as leaflets?
* How will audience development be tackled?
2) Points of concern raised by SMRs
Concern about the amount of time involved in carrying out the market
research. SMRs must think about existing and new audiences as part of the
bid, but this can be developed further as part of the project. It was
recommended that SMR Officers should share relevant information. It was
suggested that market research could be done at a national level and that
SMRs could draw on this information. However, HLF recommend that SMR should
focus on the local situation and consider the needs of local audiences.
Additional work required on the SMR. This only attracts 50% funding but is a
real benefit. The HLF has no plans to change this rule.
Role of the NMR in Scotland? Can Scottish SMRs put in bids without involving
the Scottish NMR.
Do the benefits justify the cost? There is a cost involved in putting in a
bid and a cost to the SMR in carrying out work on the project once the bid
has been awarded. Can an SMR include the cost of producing a bid in the
submission to the HLF? The cost of producing a bid cannot be reimbursed by
the HLF as part of its grant.
Concern over the lack of guidance available? The NMR is available to offer
assistance at any stage of bid preparation and SMRs are urged to consult the
NMR at an early stage. The HLF will remind its regional staff to inform SMRs
that the NMR can give advice. SMRs who have been awarded funding are also
available to offer help and guidance.
Regionally. There are differences in the character of areas, eg urban/rural,
and these will be reflected in the SMR. This should be discussed at ALGAO
SMR regional working parties.
There is a need for model documents to assist in marketing plans etc and
checklists for things which must be included. The HLF will consider this.
However, they point out that all this information is contained in 'Unlocking
the Past'. The writing up of this session will help - see checklists above.
There is a need for greater technical support /advice with web developments.
The ADS pointed out that they could offer assistance and there was useful
information on their website.
More pre-application advice is required, possibly EH led training sessions
on particular topics, eg project management. There was not enough time to
cover all of the issues, or to go into specific issues in depth, in a half
day session. EH and HLF will consider this.
More feedback is required from HLF at all stages.
If SMRs become statutory will they still be eligible for HLF funding? HLF
were unable to comment on possible future situation.
Linking into Best Value. Who are our audiences, now and in the future?
Do we need to change our method of delivery or the format of our holdings
(accessibility and interpretation)? If so how? Should be addressed as part
of market research.
Do we need to expand our links to other information sources/make these more
formal? Suggestions included links to museums, public archives, EH regional
offices, local history societies and the natural environment.
How do we give people the ability to use SMRs? How do we bridge the skills
gap? Outreach, training (eg research skills), interpretation and explanation
of technical terms.
SMRs worried about the quality of the data that will be presented to
audiences if they focus on access rather than improving the record. Also
about changing the format of data to suit particular audiences and putting
glosses on information for public access. Agreed that these are all issues
that need to be addressed and implications considered as part of bid
preparation.
There was widespread support for an illustrated thesaurus/glossary at a
national level. SMRs encouraged the NMR to take this forward as a priority.
Concerns about mapping and access to OS maps on the web.
**********************************************************************
The views and comments expressed in this email are confidential
to the recipients and should not be passed on to others without
permission. This email message does not necessarily express the
views of Bath & North East Somerset Council and should be
considered personal unless there is a specific statement to the
contrary.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been
swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
**********************************************************************
|
