7 minute read
Evaluation of the Pathfinder programme
Evaluation of the Pathfinder programme
This chapter sets out the Pathfinders’ feedback on the Design Codes Pathfinder support programme and draws on the interview analysis, the monthly reports and the participatory evaluation tools analysis. As part of the Pathfinders programme, the teams participated in activities which were set out to support them on their journey to develop exemplar Design Codes. These activities included:
$ Themed learning workshops
$ Collective roundtables
$ Expert panel sessions
$ Regular calls with the DLUHC team
Pathfinders were also encouraged to speak to each other outside of the formalised sessions to share learning and seek advice.
Pathfinder Support: In Pictures and Numbers
The panel drew out some key points to refocus efforts to address moving forward.
It’s given me confidence to be more ruthless ‘in terms of language and coding.
The workshops rated as most useful were ‘Skills, Capacity and Consultants’ and ‘Community Engagement’.
The average rating for the expert advice panels was nine out of ten.
80% of Pathfinders independently made contact with another team, outside of formal sessions.
I think one of the most useful things for us has been the peer group, and having people at the same stage as ourselves, to reach out to and have regular chats and know that we’re not alone.
A quarter of Pathfinders asked for additional guidance on community engagement, making it the most highly requested piece of support.
a. What went well
Overall, Pathfinders valued the support programme, which brought together a good mix of presentations, seminars and workshops on a range of topic areas. It also provided opportunity to speak with crossdisciplinary experts and other Pathfinder teams going through the coding process.
Bespoke advice
The opportunity to access tailored advice, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, was particularly valued, as were the direct links to members of the Office for Place Advisory Board (for example, through visits to Pathfinders’ coding areas, and access to specific help and advice that went on to inform their respective approaches to coding). Regular contact and reporting deadlines with the Office for Place also helped some Pathfinders to maintain momentum and push forward their coding programme.
Peer-to-peer support
Interacting with other Pathfinders through peer-to-peer meetings was particularly important. Peer support networks that enabled Pathfinders to learn from other approaches to developing codes were particularly valued, including those that focused on the impact of local market viability, and those that equipped Pathfinders with effective arguments to promote the benefits of coding in their local area. There was an appetite to continue connecting to one another beyond the programme, as well as with future coders.
“We’ve been approached by quite a few authorities who are now looking at making their own codes or have asked for a chat, which is really nice and we are happy to speak to anyone.”
Design advice panels
Design advice panels were effective in providing access to a range of experts and a chance to step back and take stock of the coding project. They provided clarity on purpose and ambition, and boosted confidence in execution. When the reviews came early enough in the coding process, they influenced Pathfinders’ work and thinking.
What Pathfinders liked most about these sessions was:
$ The high-quality debate and discussion; the robust critique of their own and other’s codes. “Useful feedback and robust critique from panel members.”
$ Open and supportive discussions about working together.
“Both the panel and the Pathfinders were, in a sense, working together throughout the session.”
$ Receiving specific and targeted feedback and advice, including examples and signposting to exemplars and other useful material.
“How to address the tensions between vagueness and too much detail was helpful.”
Pathfinders said they also benefitted from:
$ the calibre and diverse expertise of panel members
$ gaining new and independent perspectives
$ the opportunity to see and comment on other codes
$ the opportunity to connect with other Pathfinders.
b. What could be improved
Extra time
Pathfinders would have liked more time to plan for and deliver their design codes, and greater recognition in the programme of the time and resources required to write a quality code. Pathfinders reported that unrealistic delivery timetables impacted negatively on the process. For example, one Pathfinder found that their community engagement sessions became tick-box exercises, rather than an ongoing dialogue, due to a lack of time.
The lack of flexibility in the programme was also seen to impact the programme of support which felt rushed at times, with sessions run in close succession and coming at the wrong time in the process for some. Those Pathfinders with fewer internal resources and assets available to produce a design code, for example smaller local authorities, NPGs and those working in less affluent parts of the country, found it harder to keep pace with the programme, and to effectively plan for and attend support sessions. They also found regular reporting requirements onerous. This was a particular issue for the NPGs, who relied on volunteers and received less funding to develop their codes but who faced additional costs for items that local authorities would have in-house (for instance, printing facilities, meeting space, expenses for travel and direct access to baseline data and maps).
Clarity of seminars
While Pathfinders were overwhelmingly positive about the content covered through the seminar series, some felt it would have been beneficial to have more clarity on the purpose and key takeaways from each session. They also highlighted key topic areas that they would have liked to have been covered in more detail. These included:
$ an introduction to design codes before getting into the detail, covering definitions, their purpose, value and an outline of the process
$ the nitty-gritty of how to design the code and what to include
$ coding in rural contexts
$ coding in deprived areas
$ working with volume housebuilders.
Preparation before design advice sessions
Pathfinders would have appreciated more information on the structure and preparation required before attending the design advice session, including an outline of questions in advance. Closer briefing of the enabling panel (Design Council Experts) was also recommended by some, to prevent discussions extending beyond design coding to cover a wider scope. The timing of design advice sessions was raised as an issue, having come too late in the process for many to realistically use the sessions help shape and influence the approach taken to design coding.
Targeted support
Pathfinders who were struggling would have appreciated more direct support from staff at DLUHC/The Office for Place, to help them with dilemmas which arose during the coding process.
Peer-to-peer support was valued, but some felt more value could have been gained if Pathfinders had been matched with others working at the same stage in the coding process, and/ or in similar contexts.
Some Pathfinders felt overwhelmed by the sheer quantity of guidance and resources on design coding that was signposted. They would have appreciated advice on the extensive guidance available, including the NMDC, which some felt was difficult to navigate.
Shared resources
All Pathfinders felt they would have benefitted from easing of access restrictions to the DLUHC SharePoint, including editable monthly reporting forms that could be accessed by more than one member of the Pathfinder team. Pathfinders provided suggestions on the development of future design coding learning resources, advocating for:
$ basic and accessible information about what a design code is (including the purpose and value) that assumed less prior knowledge
$ a compressed set of learning resources that are accessible and easy to digest
$ a library resource that signposts all the guidance available, including case studies
$ a search or tagging function that clearly categorises case studies by area type or theme, so that design code teams can pick up examples that are directly relevant to their own context
$ a collaborative approach with other organisations that provide resources, for example via Public Practice or with regional and thematic Royal Town Planning Institute groups
$ simple design codes templates that can be easily modified to different contexts.
