Research and analysis

South East Wales: UKSPF summary evaluation plan

Published 4 April 2025

Applies to Wales

Summary of the local place

South East Wales, or the Cardiff Capital Region (CCR), is the largest and perhaps most diverse economic region in Wales comprising ten local authorities which includes cities, post-industrial valleys, rural market towns and coastal communities.

Map of South East Wales

The CCR Regional Economic Growth Partnership has advocated a ‘bottom-up’ or micro-economic approach to tackling their growth challenge, with an economic strategy that recognises the relative independence of micro-economies across the region and an attempt to ensure all places can realise direct and tangible economic benefits.

Parts of the region are considered as some of the most economically deprived areas in Europe (despite significant investment over many years), whilst other parts are among the most prosperous areas in Wales. In particular, there are significant social and economic disparities between the more prosperous coastal zone around Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan, and the more disadvantaged areas of the South Wales Valleys. Merthyr and Blaenau Gwent are ranked amongst the least competitive of the 362 localities that comprise the UK Competitiveness Index.^{[footnote 1]}

CCR’s Regional Economic and Industrial Plan for 2023-2028 outlines 4 key challenges that the region hopes to address which comprise:

• tackling economic disparities and boosting growth
• enhancing innovation capability and capacity
• decarbonising the environment
• improving the physical and digital infrastructure

The United Kingdom Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) investment supports a wide range of interventions across each local authority through a total aggregated notional allocation of £278.5 million. In line with the ‘bottom-up’ ethos of the region, the main emphasis has been on local not regional delivery, with each local authority determining their own priority areas and just £7 million ringfenced for specific regional projects delivered by the CCR team (although we note that regional activity has been broader than this).

A broad thematic approach was presented in the Regional Investment Plan, with a sizeable proportion of the core budget allocated to each investment priority (47% for Communities and Place, 23% for Supporting Local Business, and 30% for People and Skills)^{[footnote 2]}, and all 53 potential intervention types selected, including 495 projects in total at the end of Year 2 and a forecasted final project count of 571, with substantial variance across each area.

Unit of analysis

The evaluation will primarily focus on impact at a local authority level, reflecting the local delivery focus within the region and lack of cross-authority interventions.

Given the scale and diversity of project interventions, it would not be feasible for the evaluation to capture all interventions and impacts. Accordingly, the evaluation will focus on four thematic areas for deep dive impact analysis:

• revitalising town centres and community places
• support for community organisations and access to services
• business grant support
• support for those furthest away from the labour market

Methodological approach

Process evaluation

The process evaluation will analyse core areas including fund design, fund implementation, delivery of interventions and data collection and monitoring. Process evaluation tasks will involve review of data, documents and changes to policy and socio-economic context, consultations with delivery and strategic stakeholders and surveys with project delivery bodies.

Impact evaluation

Quasi-experimental design (QED) approaches have been considered for each element of the evaluation, with the following conclusions.

• Key Focus Area 1 (Revitalising town centres and community places) – it is assessed that QED would be viable provided that appropriate intervention and comparator towns can be identified with appropriate monitoring data available. Further consultation with each LA is required to finalise this approach.
• Key Focus Area 2 (Support for community organisations and access to services) – it is assessed that QED would unlikely be viable due to a lack of a suitable comparator group.
• Key Focus Area 3 (Business grant support) – it is assessed that QED would not be viable due to the timing of the interventions and the relatively small scale of the impacts generated.
• Key Focus Area 4 (Support for those furthest away from the labour market) – it is assessed that QED would be viable utilising the DWP Datalab.

Across all 4, a Contribution Analysis impact evaluation method is proposed (with the QED providing complementary evidence where applicable). This will allow for assessment of the changes in key outcome indicators relating to each intervention type, and an analysis of the contribution made to those changes by UKSPF funded activities.

Economic evaluation

It is proposed that the economic evaluation will follow the 4E’s approach set out by the National Audit office, considering economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equity of the programme investments. Where possible, this will incorporate cost effectiveness analysis drawing on the net additional impact analysis from the quasi-experimental design relating to the ‘Revitalising town centres and community places’ and ‘Support for those furthest away from the labour market’ key focus areas.

Data to support the evaluation

The following data sources will be used across the four key focus areas for the impact evaluation:

Primary data collection

Revitalising town centres and community places	Support for community organisations and access to services	Business grant support	Support for those furthest away from the labour market
■ Stakeholder consultation (strategic and delivery) ■ Your Community, Your Say survey ■ Consultation with community organisation beneficiaries and their users ■ Survey of local residents and town centre stakeholders	■ Stakeholder consultation ■ Consultation with delivery providers ■ Consultation with community organisation beneficiaries and their users ■ Your Community, Your Say survey ■ Survey of non-supported community organisations.	■ Stakeholder consultation (strategic and delivery)Consultation with delivery providers ■ Surveys of business beneficiaries ■ Surveys of non-supported businesses.	■ Stakeholder consultation (strategic and delivery) ■ Consultation with delivery providers ■ Surveys of supported individuals

Secondary data sources

Revitalising town centres and community places	Support for community organisations and access to services	Business grant support	Support for those furthest away from the labour market
■ National Survey for Wales ■ Town centre vacancy data (project data, local authority data) ■ Local data on footfall. ■ GB Tourism and Visit Wales visitor numbers and spend data ■ Web searches for intervention areas (local project data)	■ Local programme data on investment in community assets, events, user numbers, and perceived experience ■ National Survey for Wales	■ Local programme data on investment in jobs, new businesses, new markets etc. ■ ONS data on business counts, employment, business births, deaths and survival rates.	■ ONS data on unemployment, Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEETs), earnings and economic activity. ■ Annual Population Survey ■ DWP Datalab

1. UK Competitiveness Index 2023 ↩

2. We note that the proportion spent on each investment priority has changed from the original Regional Investment Plan as local authorities firmed up their individual delivery plans, and these continue to evolve with changes to local investment plans. ↩