Research and analysis

Maidstone: UKSPF summary evaluation plan

Published 4 April 2025

Applies to England

Summary of the local place

The borough of Maidstone is located approximately 32 miles from London. The River Medway runs through Maidstone connecting it to the Thames Estuary. Maidstone town centre is the borough’s central hub, while nearby villages contribute to the borough’s overall landscape, providing a balance of urban and rural settings. Maidstone had a population of approximately 176,700 people in 2021.

Map of Maidstone

Maidstone Borough Council (MBC) has received £1.2 million of United Kingdom Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) investment which is being used to support a wide range of small-to-medium sized projects. Maidstone was selected as a case study because it typified the approach adopted by many Local Authorities with a single major town – using UKSPF funding to help drive footfall in the town centre. Selecting Maidstone as a case study therefore allows us to showcase one of the ways that several lead local authorities (LLAs) have used UKSPF. Additionally, MBC has focused its investment in ‘Communities and Place’ priority area. This is not a common occurrence in other case study areas; therefore, it provides an opportunity to assess the merits of a unique delivery approach. Furthermore, MBC has received funding from Rural England Prosperity Fund which has been leveraged to support UKSPF interventions, again allowing us to investigate a different delivery model.

Unit of analysis

The evaluation will study the impact of UKSPF investment in Maidstone town centre area, where the majority of the UKSPF interventions have been implemented. However, as a small, single town local authority, these interventions will benefit the whole of the local authority population. As many interventions have been supported by UKSPF investment in Maidstone, the available resources will not allow for a detailed exploration of all funded activities. During the scoping stage interviews, the LLA at Maidstone helped to identify priority interventions for the evaluation. The creative community grants, green spaces volunteering intervention, and the art and digital trial projects were highlighted as key focus areas, as they account for a large share of the funding and provide demonstrable examples of how UKSPF has helped to create outcomes for the local area.

Methodological approach

We will adopt a mixed-methods approach that combines primary research and secondary data analysis, underpinned by a contribution analysis framework.

Process evaluation

We will undertake a process evaluation to assess the relevance, efficiency, and effectiveness of process used. This process evaluation will be informed through several data sources, including:

• Document review of relevant documentation to understand the fund’s design, objectives, and strategic alignment with local and national goals.
• Stakeholder interviews with MBC staff, a selection of local delivery providers and other relevant stakeholders. These interviews will capture insights into the effectiveness of the design and delivery processes.
• Monitoring and secondary data to demonstrate the scale of local challenges and to determine if UKSPF interventions were targeted towards areas most in need of support in Maidstone.

Impact evaluation

Maidstone’s UKSPF interventions have focused on ‘Communities and Place’ and as such the benefits are more social, non-quantifiable, and intangible in nature (e.g. changes in perceptions, new skills gained). Consequently, for most outcome and impact areas, a quasi-experimental design is not feasible as there is no feasible way of being able to quantitatively measure additional progress. Additionally, with UKSPF interventions in Maidstone available to all residents, there is not always a feasible non-beneficiary group to use as a comparator. For some outcome areas (e.g. increased footfall, reduce crime and fear of crime), we will benchmark the data against other local areas or national averages.

For outcome and impacts areas, the evaluation will draw primarily on a theory-based evaluation (TBE) approach. Specifically, it will use a contribution analysis framework (see Appendix A) to systematically test all the evidence collected to determine whether the Theory of Change is valid explanation of change, and how far external factors may have influenced outcomes. This will involve reviewing the available evidence from the different sources of data in a step-by-step process to provide a robust assessment of the contribution claims (set out in Appendix A) to determine whether the Theory of Change is an adequate explanation for any observed changes. It can also help determine whether any non-programme mechanisms may be responsible for the changes seen instead.

Economic evaluation

Following the National Audit Office’s 4Es, the evaluation will consider programme economy (by assessing ability to leverage additional in-kind or financial support), efficiency (by calculating costs per output and costs per outcomes, and benchmarking these against comparator programmes), effectiveness (using contribution analysis to determine whether UKSPF is plausible driver for outcomes), and equity (determining whether UKSPF has interventions targeted towards areas most in need of support in Maidstone).

Data to support the evaluation

Primary data collection

Beneficiary surveys will be an important data source. As Maidstone’s UKSPF investments fall under the ‘Communities and Place’ priority area, we will implement the ‘Your Community, Your Say’ survey in Maidstone, which contains relevant modules on pride and place, satisfaction with green spaces, culture and heritage activities. Additionally, we will implement a beneficiary survey targeting those participating in the green spaces volunteering project.

We will also conduct semi-structured interviews, focused on both impact and process elements. Longer 45-60 minutes with MBC staff and key strategic stakeholders (e.g. Anchor Institutions Group, local MPs, elected members) will cover project-level and programme-level perspectives. Interviews with selected delivery provider leads will last 30-45 minutes, with lighter touch programme-level discussions. Beneficiary interviews will be a maximum of 30 minutes long and focused on specific key issues, such as process elements (e.g. quality of engagement) and impact elements (e.g. skills gained).

Through delivery observation of selected projects, we will assess impact (e.g. by viewing beneficiary reaction), and process elements (e.g. quality of project delivery).

Secondary data sources

Our analysis will draw on the following secondary data collection activities:

• Programme monitoring data analysis (e.g. number of individuals and organisations supported, geographical areas reached, type of support provided).
• Secondary data analysis of footfall, retail vacancy, business income and visitor data collected by MBC and data from Crime Survey in England and Wales, ‘Your Community, Your Say’ survey, ‘Understanding Society’ survey and social media analysis.