Download - Monitoring and Evaluation Heritage Tourism Project Key Issues as envisaged by Cadw Howard James
Monitoring and Evaluation
Heritage Tourism Project
Key Issues as envisaged
by Cadw
Howard James
Key requirements
• Visitor numbers each year• Two visitor surveys to determine type and
therefore value of visitor• Any other key outputs/ outcomes relating to
a particular project
Why M&E ?
• General good practice
• Must be able to demonstrate to WEFO that proposed outputs and outcomes are being delivered
Why common E4G approach?
• Significant cost savings eg reduced sample sizes
• Provide more substantial evidence base• Increased guidance and support
Visitor numbers
Must know how many extra visitors result from any project
Can be collected in variety of ways• Staffed /paying sites/events• Electronic counters –used widely by Cadw• Head counts on specified days
Visitor surveys –sample numbers
• Most of “jobs” created by project will be indirect
• Can only calculate wider economic impact through survey
• Survey numbers significantly reduced overall through joint E4G approach
Visitor surveys -2011
• Some projects will not be completed in 2011
• Will visitors be used in survey for those projects which are open, but not completed?
E4G visitor surveys - links
• very similar to Cadw visitor surveys• May well be similar to surveys carried out
by delivery partners –if so can incorporate within other survey
• Can survey more than minimum requested but weighting reduced for overall E4G sample
M&E –after end of funding period
• M&E will need to continue until [2025?] at least
• Visitor numbers and other key outputs /outcomes need to be collected
• Particularly important for projects finishing close to end of funding period
• Getting it right in initial visitor surveys reduces risks of needing further survey