Near_Neighbours_Coventry_University_Evaluation (1)

An Evaluative Framework
for Near Neighbours
Final Report
Prepared by: Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations, Coventry University
Prepared for: Near Neighbours Evaluation Group

Executive Summary 3
Recommendations 4
Introduction 5
The Context 5
The Coventry University Approach and Team 7
The Centre for Trust, Peace and
Social Relations 7
The Approach 7
The Programme, Previous Evaluation and
Existing Monitoring 8
Our Understanding of Near Neighbours 8
Existing evaluation, monitoring and
continuous learning tools: 9
Application and Award Data 9
Small Grants Monitoring 9
Small Grant Recipient Surveys 9
Small Grants Debrief Sessions 10
Catalyst Programme Evaluation 10
National Coordinator and
Partner Meetings 10
Near Neighbours: Impact and Evaluation 11
The Impact of Near Neighbours: What
We Have Seen 11
Enabling Transformative Action 12
Relational Working: Beyond the
Usual Suspects 12
Adding Value: Intelligent,
Locally-integrated Support 13
Spotlight on Near Neighbours
Partners: The Feast and Catalyst 13
The Impact of Near Neighbours: Informing
the Evaluative Framework 15
Existing Evaluation 15
Shared Understanding, Vision and
Purpose 16
The Role of Coordinators 16
A Diversity of Activity 16
Much More Than Grants 16
Catalyst 17
Fieldwork Conclusions for the
Evaluative Framework 17
Conceptual Framework 18
Five Key Themes for Evaluating and
Monitoring Near Neighbours 18
Social Interaction and
Social Action 18
Leadership 18
Sustainability 18
Local Action 8
Visualising Evaluation: Conceptual
Framework Diagram 19
Collecting Data and Evidence 20
Groups of Indicators 20
Theory of Change 21
A Theory of Change for Near Neighbours 21
Aim: An Overarching Vision for
Near Neighbours 21
Outcomes: The Intermediate
Changes Near Neighbours
Creates 22
Activities: What the Near
Neighbours Team Do 23
Theory of Change Diagram 25
Adding Outputs: Near Neighbours
Theory of Change and Conceptual
Framework 25
Theory of Change Conclusion 27
The Tools and Using Them to Capture Impact 28
Standardised Data Spreadsheet 28
Coordinator Logbook 28
Case Study System 29
Catalyst Evaluation 30
Using the tools and demonstrating impact 30
Standardised Data Spreadsheet 30
Case study System 33
Coordinator Logbook 35
Report Conclusions 36
Recommendations 37
Appendices 38
Appendix 1: What is a Theory of Change 38
Appendix 2: Case Study System 39
CONTENTS
Lead Authors: Tom Fisher and Daniel Range
Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations
Coventry University

3 Executive Summary
Near Neighbours is a national programme working
across England, including in London, Luton, Leicester,
Nottingham, Birmingham, the Black Country, Burnley,
Oldham, Rochdale, Bury, Bradford, Dewsbury and Leeds
towards the following key objectives:
• Promoting social interaction: developing positive
relationships in multi-faith areas, including helping
people from different faiths get to know and
understand each other;
• Promoting social action: encouraging people of
different faiths and of no faith to come together for
initiatives that improve their local neighbourhood.
This report presents the work undertaken by the
Coventry University team in developing an evaluative
framework for Near Neighbours, and assessing the
impact of the Programme against its aims. The
approach taken has been based on a significant
investment of time in learning about Near Neighbours
from those closest to the Programme and has resulted
in a strong understanding of how the Programme
operates, its distinctiveness and where and how its
successes and impact can be measured. Time was
spent during the project in the following five case study
areas: Birmingham, Black Country, Bradford, Luton and
West London. The understanding developed has been
translated into a conceptual framework, a Theory of
Change and a set of evaluation and monitoring tools.
The Coventry University team have seen very clearly
that Near Neighbours has provided the platform for
people to work with their neighbours to enact positive
change in local areas. The Programme has achieved
this by offering people funding, opportunity, guidance
from locally embedded coordinators and, often, the
confidence to take a first step in organised social action
and social interaction. Working with national partners
whose work complements the aims of Near Neighbours
is a clear distinctive element of the Programme and has
significantly enhanced delivery and impact.
True to the aims of the Programme, those who engage
with the Programme represent a huge diversity of
backgrounds and through Near Neighbours have contact
with people of different faith and cultural backgrounds
to themselves. The data collected shows that Near
Neighbours is objectively a multifaith programme that
enables different faith groups to work together.
The level of autonomy delegated to local actors in the
Programme is strikingly different from the Coventry
University team’s experience of relatively top-down
and often state-led approaches used to grow social
cohesion in the past. From the outside, Near Neighbours
could seem to resemble a straight-forward national
grant scheme; the team’s experience, however, has
shown that the critical roles, skills and networks of the
local coordinators – who are provided with a useful level
of autonomy and have a first-rate understanding of
the local area – , as well as the interplay between the
various national specialists, enhances the significance of
the Programme hugely, helping to boost the impact of
grants and build sustainable community networks within
neighbourhoods.
The fieldwork findings from the project have been
synthesised into key themes which encapsulate the core
elements of Near Neighbours’ work. To achieve this, the
team have developed a conceptual framework that
underpins the approach to monitoring and evaluation,
based on the following five key themes. These themes
all relate to performance indicators for Near Neighbours
presented in the full report.
Social action and social interaction: bringing people
together to build relationships between people of
different faiths and cultures and to improve local areas
Leadership: enhancing the capacity of and providing
encouragement for those who can take a leading role in
social action and interaction in the future.
Sustainability: ensuring wherever possible that projects
are able to continue beyond initial Near Neighbours
support
Local Action: recognising that bringing people together
who are embedded and invested in their local area and
can work with others locally is an important factor for
success.
In short, the Programme has all the strengths of a
prominent national programme and works towards far-
reaching societal goals whilst being able to support a
range of relevant, non-intrusive, impactful and locally-
led activity. The core findings related to this are that:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary 4
• Near Neighbours is enabling local action:
Across the five case-study areas between 68%
and 81% of projects awarded small grants funding
are delivering in the same postcode area that the
lead organisation is based in, leading to a clear
conclusion that the Programme is successfully
delivering on its aim to enable people to take action
in their own local areas.
• Near Neighbours is increasing social action:
Over 33,000 people are estimated to have been
involved in small grants funded activities during
this 10 month period. This has been enabled by an
estimated 1,775 volunteers putting in over 44,000
hours of work showing the extent of the reach
of Near Neighbours in increasing social action
participation and leadership and, furthermore,
in funding social action that is new and uniquely
supported by Near Neighbours.
• Near Neighbours is increasing social
interaction: In 3 of the 5 case study areas, every
single small grant awarded was for multifaith
activities and in the other 2 areas, 97% and 96% of
projects were multifaith. The respective remaining
3% and 4% in those two areas were for activities
for people of the same faith but of different
ethnicities. Further data collected also shows that
the vast majority of these projects were led by
non-Christians. This data offers clear evidence that
Near Neighbours is a truly multifaith programme,
accessible to all faiths and reaching beyond the
Christian faith to enable significant amounts of
interaction between people of many different
faiths.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Concluding this report are a short set of
recommendations that link directly to the evaluation and
monitoring activity of Near Neighbours. The Coventry
University team recommends that:
1. The tools and framework set out in this report
be rolled out to all Near Neighbours areas with
the provision of training and support in their use,
preferably within a face-to-face training session;
2. The Near Neighbours Theory of Change should be
used within every level of the Programme and its
logic and contents should be regularly challenged,
tested and revisited;
3. The Standardised Data Collection Spreadsheet
developed and piloted as part of this project should
be re-launched for users and transferred to a more
user-friendly medium such as MS Excel, encouraging
more and more effective data collection activity;
4. A focus should be placed on the greater
sustainability of projects after small grants funding
has ended. Near Neighbours is building capacity in
local areas and this capacity could be made best
use of, and momentum maintained, if small grants
recipients were signposted towards other sources of
further funding by coordinators.

5 Introduction
Near Neighbours is a national programme working
across England, including in London, Luton, Leicester,
Nottingham, Birmingham, the Black Country, Burnley,
Oldham, Rochdale, Bury, Bradford, Dewsbury and Leeds
towards the following key objectives:
• Promoting social interaction: developing positive
relationships in multi-faith areas, including helping
people from different faiths get to know and
understand each other better;
• Promoting social action: encouraging people of
different faiths and of no faith to come together for
initiatives that improve their local neighbourhood.
In each Near Neighbours location there is a dedicated
area coordinator working from a Near Neighbours
‘hub’. The coordinator is tasked with developing and
promoting the Programme locally, connecting local
groups and activities and encouraging new individuals
and groups to become involved. National partners –
experts in specific fields, interventions and activities
– support this local work and are complemented by a
national small grants scheme which provides funding to
bring together people from different faith and non-faith
backgrounds to get to know one another better and to
work together to improve the local area.
National partners in the Near Neighbours Programme
include Nehemiah Foundation, The Feast, 3FF, Catalyst,
Christian Muslim Forum, Hindu Christian Forum and The
Council of Christians and Jews.
The Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations
at Coventry University was commissioned by Near
Neighbours in September 2014 with a brief to design
an evaluation system which appropriately captures
the collective performance and impact of the Near
Neighbours Programme. Key requirements of this work
were as follows:
• It should use as its starting point the principles and
approach of Collective Impact;
• Particular attention should be given at every stage
to continuous learning, what progress is being made
and how and why this is happening;
• A need to develop both qualitative and quantitative
tools for evaluation;
• A desire to take into account all key aspects of Near
Neighbours, including investment in and work of the
area coordinators and the Near Neighbours Grants
Fund;
• A modest budget for a project delivered within tight
timescales, including the flexibility to undertake a
significant portion of the work within the first few
months of the project.
THE CONTEXT
Relations between faith groups and perceptions of
religion are two critical issues in the UK. Tensions
between groups, including faith groups and those of
no faith, at the local level are influenced more than
ever before by international events, media output and
geopolitics, with the negative results often seen all
too starkly on the streets of UK cities. The Church of
England, with a physical presence in every parish in the
country, is well placed to be an agent of change and
catalyst of local action in response to these issues.
Our understanding at the Centre for Trust, Peace and
Social Relations is that Near Neighbours has been
developed in direct response to these challenges,
working to enhance interaction and build trust between
people of different faiths whilst simultaneously
creating the conditions for much needed social
action. Clearly any programme which can successfully
and simultaneously address these two areas has the
potential to significantly enhance policy and practice
at national and international levels alongside its role as
a powerful local change-maker. Being able to measure
and demonstrate progress and success when working to
resolve complex and deep-rooted social and economic
challenges is a difficult but essential capability.
The final product of this piece of work is a tailored
set of tools that Church Urban Fund (CUF) – the
Church of England’s social action charity - can use
to facilitate the on-going evaluation and monitoring
of the Near Neighbours Programme. This will have a
focus on continuous learning and improvement as
well as recording the reach and significance of Near
Neighbours’ work. In order to develop such a series of
tools, it is vital that the Coventry Team understand
INTRODUCTION

Introduction 6
the goals of Near Neighbours and the impact that it
wishes to have. Understanding what impact to capture
is central to developing a set of tools. This work will,
therefore, also provide a review of the successes of the
Programme and outline both areas of significant impact
and areas of potential improvement observed during the
Coventry Team’s time with Near Neighbours.
This report is a final presentation to the commissioning
body that draws together the findings and outputs of
the team from project inception to project completion.
The work took place over a period of 15 months from
October 2014 to January 2016. This report provides
detail of the approach taken in addressing the brief
and presents key findings from a period of fieldwork
(time spent working across Near Neighbours to develop
an understanding of the Programme). The report goes
on to present a framework for evaluation including
key concepts developed from fieldwork findings which
underpin the evaluation approach, a Theory of Change
setting out the logical path of how change is created
in Near Neighbours and a set of easy-to-use evaluation
tools alongside evaluation recommendations for the
near future.

7 The Coventry University Approach and Team
THE CENTRE FOR TRUST,
PEACE AND SOCIAL
RELATIONS
The Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations is
a multidisciplinary, applied research centre based
at Coventry University. Our focus is on research and
action which grows the capacity of all actors to work
towards peaceful and resilient societies. Building on
Coventry’s history in peace, reconciliation and social
cohesion, we bring together expertise from across
the world and every aspect of the social sciences and
humanities to strengthen our understanding of the
greatest challenges arising from an ever-changing and
connected world. We provide evidence and support on
issues as diverse as local multifaith action in the UK to
national peacebuilding initiatives across Africa, aiming
to support the work of local practitioners, governments,
global organisations such as the UN and everyone in-
between.
THE APPROACH
The methods and approach applied during this project
are based around the need for a successful evaluative
framework to be informed by a deep and nuanced
understanding of Near Neighbours, its work and
impact. An approach was designed that allowed the
Coventry University team to spend time observing and
working alongside those closest to Near Neighbours,
learning from their practice and involving them in the
process. The consultants visited five Near Neighbours
hubs, spent time with the central administrative team
in London, attended a range of related events and
hosted a Theory of Change workshop for representatives
from across the Programme (described in more detail
later in this report). The majority of fieldwork involved
listening, observing and interpreting the work of the
Near Neighbours team, viewing it through the lens
of evaluation and impact. Insights gathered here
have been synthesised into a conceptual framework
which underpins the evaluative approach, a Theory of
Change and a set of evaluation tools for use across the
Programme.
It was agreed early on in the work that, despite its
mention in the original brief, an outright ‘Collective
Impact’ approach would not be followed. Though
Collective Impact offers a distinctive approach to
addressing complex social problems, a true Collective
Impact framework is comprised of a large and rigid
series of organisations and processes and, after initial
inquiry, was found to be not one which is ideally suited
to the Near Neighbours Programme. Applying such an
approach to Near Neighbours would significantly alter
the ethos and operation of the Programme, potentially
leading to a more ‘top down’ and prescriptive approach
with greater centralisation of activities and planning
duties falling upon the central team in London. The
establishment of an overarching backbone organisation
would also, at the very least, entail extra staffing costs
and resourcing. It was agreed, therefore, to use some
ideas from the approach to inform the process but to
develop an approach which was wholly bespoke to Near
Neighbours and its successes.
THE COVENTRY UNIVERSITY
APPROACH AND TEAM

The Programme, Previous Evaluation and Existing Monitoring 8
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF
NEAR NEIGHBOURS
Near Neighbours is a wide reaching programme
operated by CUF with the aim of bringing people
from different faith backgrounds who live close to one
another together so that they can get to know one
another, build relationships of trust and work together to
tackle community issues.
The two key objectives of Near Neighbours are to
increase levels of social interaction and social action;
it aims to enable people who are different from each
other come together to get to know one another and
develop an understanding of each other and to allow
people to come together to take action that improves
their local area. The primary, but not exclusive, focus of
the Programme is on multifaith work, although it is open
to those of no faith group too. Amongst other groups
Near Neighbours has worked with Christians of many
denominations, Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Sikhs, Baha’I and
people of no-faith.
Near Neighbours is now in its second phase, with this
latest instalment seeing the Programme expand in its
geographical reach. The areas now covered by Near
Neighbours include most of London, Luton, Leicester,
Nottingham, Birmingham, the Black Country and Bury,
Rochdale, Oldham, Burnley, Leeds, Bradford and
Dewsbury.
Near Neighbours consists of 3 core elements. These
are 1.) a small grants programme which provides seed
funding for mixed local groups to undertake new
activities or projects, 2.) local area coordinators who
work in local hubs to build relationships and capacity
as well as signposting towards and helping with small
grants applications, and 3.) the collaboration of a group
of national-level partners, including Catalyst, Nehemiah
Foundation, The Feast, 3FF, Christian Muslim Forum,
Hindu Christian Forum and The Council of Christians and
Jews.
The Programme has already been subject to significant
external, summative evaluation. Research has been
undertaken on single, in-depth aspects of Near
Neighbours, such as case study research into specific
locations in which Near Neighbours is active, as well as
studies which have taken a breadth-based approach,
looking across Near Neighbours, aiming to quantify and
generalise the impact of the Programme at a national
level.
The evaluative work to date has reported a range of
positive findings, including:
• placing emphasis on the ability of Near Neighbours
to use faith as a motivation for social action in very
local areas
• the importance of the Near Neighbours coordinators
in adapting the Programme to the local context
and in raising the profile and overall success of the
Programme
• the usefulness of the grants programme in
facilitating action that is sustained beyond the initial
funding, particularly stressing the importance of the
‘light-touch’ nature of the process for applicants
• some limited generalizable evidence that Near
Neighbours has a positive effect on increasing
social action and interaction between different
faith groups
One clear theme arising from most of this previous
research has been the challenge in evidencing the
change that results from the work of Near Neighbours.
Previous research teams have stressed the complexity of
both the Programme and the context in which it works;
progress in social action, trust, social interaction and
related themes such as prejudice are all difficult to
provide comparative or conclusive findings on because
of their intangible nature and their relationship with the
external environment (demographic shifts, geo-politics,
local community change, etc.). Studies across the
breadth of Near Neighbours have found that systematic,
quantitative measurement of progress in these areas
THE PROGRAMME, PREVIOUS
EVALUATION AND EXISTING
MONITORING

9 The Programme, Previous Evaluation and Existing Monitoring
was challenging and were able to only tentatively
– rather than conclusively – attribute broad-based
societal change to the work of the Programme. Studies
of depth have found that the transformative power of
Near Neighbours was evident and powerful in much
of its work but that the impact took a different form in
each case, only really being shown effectively when
presented on a case-by-case basis.
This piece of work differs in scope to those before it
in its focus on providing a framework to guide Near
Neighbours’ own evaluation work rather than solely
providing a summative ‘has it worked’ style evaluation.
There is, however, a strand of this work that does offer
summative insights on the Programme which builds on
the findings above, using data from the experiences
generated during the Coventry University team’s time
working with Near Neighbours. The previous evaluation
work therefore provides a strong foundation for this
piece of work.
EXISTING EVALUATION,
MONITORING AND
CONTINUOUS LEARNING
TOOLS:
CUF have placed a strong and clear focus on internal
evaluation and monitoring of Near Neighbours, as well
as ensuring that practice is shared between areas and
that continuous learning takes place. This approach and
strong focus on evaluation is discussed in more detail in
later sections of this report.
Understanding the existing tools that are in place
for evaluation, monitoring and continuous learning
related to the Near Neighbours Programme is central
to developing new tools and assessing the impact of
the Programme. The core evaluation, monitoring and
continuous learning that took place at the time of
commissioning were:
Application and Award Data
The internal GIFTS spreadsheet is used to track and
record all applications for small grants funding. Here
details about the proposals are logged including the
target audience(s), the classification of the activity
and the level of deprivation in the geographic area of
work. Additional to this there is a high level of detail
given for either supporting or declining an application.
This ensures a consistent and auditable approach to
awarding small grants.
Though the success rate of applications to the small
grants programme is high, this should not be taken as a
sign that grants are given out without due process but
rather as an indication of the amount of work that goes
into the checking of applications and the support that
is offered to applicants before submission. This pre-
approval work ensures that unsuitable applications are
separated out early in the process and those with the
strongest case for support against the Near Neighbours
aims are given it.
Small Grants Monitoring
Responsibility for monitoring the progress of awarded
small grants is split between the CUF central team
and the local area coordinators. Progress is regularly
uploaded to Excel spreadsheets that are shared
between the two groups and a ‘triangulation’ of
monitoring data takes place that enables projects which
have fallen behind or which have not been delivering
requested monitoring feedback to be noted, and for
remedial action to take place.
There is some uniformity in the way that this data is
recorded and collected but there is no standardised
approach. Some areas are also much more detailed and
prompt in their recording and uploading of data than
others.
Small Grant Recipient Surveys
CUF have sought direct feedback from small grants
recipients as to the impact of the small grant funded
programmes and their experiences of Near Neighbours.
Surveys have been conducted online, recording the
beneficiaries of the projects as well as details of those
who have worked on them and the perceived impacts
related to Near Neighbours aims
The surveys are well designed and, in general, responses
to the survey have shown that the recipients have had a
positive experience of working with CUF. They also show
that projects have been impactful in line with the aims

of Near Neighbours. The response rate to the survey,
however, is typically low as recipients are not
incentivised to respond and the sample of respondents
could be seen as self-selecting if respondents are
more likely to be inclined to share positive stories and
experiences that are negative.
A wider evaluative piece of work of small grants
recipients can be found in the study of Near Neighbours
Phase 1 small grant recipients that covered grants
awarded from August 2011 to December 2013. This
demonstrated a much higher response rate with 351
from 576 recipients responding.
Small Grants Debrief Sessions
Coordinators in some of the study areas have run
debrief sessions with small grants recipients after
projects have been completed. These sessions were
seen as a useful way of keeping in touch with small
grant recipients, cementing local relationships,
signposting towards further sources of funding and
promoting further activity and learning from the
experiences gained as part of the small grants process.
These debriefs were organised in a relatively informal
way which did not have a standardised data capture or
target output, such as the production of a case study.
Catalyst Programme Evaluation
Participants on the Catalyst Programme are asked to
give their experiences of the sessions and/or residential
that they have attended at the end of their course and
some follow up work is undertaken by coordinators
with regards to keeping in touch with the alumni and
signposting them towards other activities. There is, as
yet, no formalised strategy or target setting for this.
National Coordinator and Partner Meetings
Near Neighbours organise regular national meetings
of co-ordinators, relevant Near Neighbours staff and
partners to give updates on the Programme, to share
practice and success and to discuss pertinent issues.
Although no formalised learning or monitoring takes
place at these events, they seem to be highly valued
by coordinators and partners and are recognised as
an important tool for the sharing of knowledge and
improving of practice.
The Programme, Previous Evaluation and Existing Monitoring 10

11 Near Neighbours: Impact and Evaluation
The Coventry University team’s work on the evaluative
framework has provided a strong understanding of
how the Programme works as well as its many and
diverse impacts and successes. Whilst the primary
focus of this project has been to provide an evaluative
framework for Near Neighbours, a secondary aim and
part of the process of developing these tools has
been to understand the impact, distinctiveness and
success of Near Neighbours in local areas. This section
reflects those two separate but related areas of focus
by providing insight and findings from the Coventry
University team’s ‘fieldwork’ phase – time spent working
alongside the Near Neighbours team in five local areas
and with a range of other parts of the Programme. The
section outlines the key findings and thoughts on the
impact, distinctiveness and success of the Programme
gained from this fieldwork, reflecting at each stage
a specific focus on the current and potential role
of evaluation for Near Neighbours, in relation to the
development of an evaluative framework.
THE IMPACT OF NEAR
NEIGHBOURS: WHAT WE
HAVE SEEN
Taking the role of consultants with the opportunity to
observe and take part in the Programme at a number of
different levels has allowed the Coventry University team
to understand and reflect upon Near Neighbours and
its work. Presented here are the team’s reflections and
insights on Near Neighbours, its team and partners after
more than a year of working across the Programme.
As its written aims suggest, Near Neighbours exists to
promote local social action and social interaction at
a grassroots level and to bring people together from
different faiths and cultures. In practice, we have seen
that Near Neighbours works towards these aims by
providing and catalysing a complex and wide-ranging
package of actions in local areas, delivered by an array
of national, regional, local and, crucially, neighbourhood
partners that interact with and are actively working
towards similar aims as each other.
In order to develop and test the evaluation and
monitoring tools developed during this piece of work,
it has been essential to use these aims as a central
point of reference. The data gathered from these
evaluation tools is discussed in detail later in this report;
a summary of this data is included here, however, as
useful background context to this section’s discussion
of impact. Data collected within the evaluation tools
focusing on five case study areas during the period 1st
April 2015 to 22nd February 2016 shows that:
• Near Neighbours is enabling local action: Across the
five study areas between 68% and 81% of projects
awarded small grants funding are delivering in the
same postcode area that the lead organisation
is based in, leading to a clear conclusion that the
Programme is successfully delivering on its aim to
enable people to take action in their own local
areas;
• Near Neighbours is increasing social action: Over
33,000 people are estimated to have been involved
in small grants funded activities during this 10 month
period. This has been enabled by an estimated
1,775 volunteers putting in over 44,000 hours of
work showing the extent of the reach of Near
Neighbours in increasing social action participation
and leadership and, furthermore, in funding social
action that is new and uniquely supported by Near
Neighbours;
• Near Neighbours is increasing social interaction:
In 3 of the 5 case study areas, every single small
grant awarded was for multi-faith activities and in
the other 2 areas, 97% and 96% of projects were
multi-faith. The respective remaining 3% and 4% in
those two areas were for activities for people of
the same faith but of different ethnicities. Further
data collected also shows that the vast majority of
these projects were led by non-Christians. This data
offers clear evidence that Near Neighbours is a
truly multi-faith programme, accessible to all faiths
and reaching beyond the Christian faith to enable
significant amounts of interaction between people
of many different faiths.
Supporting this quantitative data with deeper, more
qualitative observations, the Coventry University team’s
experiences and reflections on the impact of Near
Neighbours can be discussed within the following
themes.
NEAR NEIGHBOURS: IMPACT AND
EVALUATION

Enabling Transformative Action
During time spent working with Near Neighbours, the
team had access to the experiences of a range of
individuals and groups which showed that involvement
in the Programme, through receiving funding, attending
projects, taking part in courses and activities, and other
areas of work, has been transformative in a range of
different ways. Judging from what the team has seen,
Near Neighbours regularly provides support, advice,
funding and opportunity to people that enables them to
make a difference in their areas and the lives of others.
It is able to mobilise resources, including those of social,
religious, cultural and spiritual capital, that otherwise
would be left out of the community development
process; through this it empowers people to enact and
lead local change.
One good example of this transformative effect can
be seen in a project led by three local Zimbabwean
men in Yorkshire. In a response to social exclusion and
violent racist attacks against one of the men, the group
decided to use football to enact change. With the help
of a local vicar, the local Near Neighbours coordinator
and funding from the Near Neighbours small grants
programme, the group established a football team
– launched with an event in the local Church – with
the aim of bringing people from the different faith
and ethnic groups in the local area together to build
relationships between them.
The group, including retired professional footballers,
started training sessions with a few young people
in the park and have now gone on to build a self-
sustaining, self-funding club of 40 people from lots
of different faiths and cultural backgrounds, as well
as a team of 8 volunteers, all meeting to train twice
a week and currently set to enter multiple teams into
the local football league. The impact of this has been
transformative not just for those in the team, who
now have much more contact with people from other
backgrounds than before, but has made a significant
difference to the lives of the 3 leaders. During the
Coventry University team’s visit, one of the founders said:
“I am accepted in the area now. I can speak to my
neighbour now because I’m known as the football guy.
He’ll ask me when the next session is. […] And my car
and house has been left alone since the project started
– I think the kids from the football protect them!”
Clearly the ingredients of this success extend well
beyond the role of Near Neighbours: the project
leaders are gifted in this work and have the foresight
and patience to approach a very negative situation
in a positive way. The project’s inception and success,
however, have a clear link to the Near Neighbours input
which provided the group with a chance to put their
creativity and passion into practice and demonstrate
that the project is worth investing in.
In our experience, with the acknowledgement that
the Coventry University team were necessarily taken
to successful projects, this example is typical of the
potential transformative nature of Near Neighbours’
involvement for both social action – in this case,
in addressing prejudice and violence – and social
interaction – bringing people together that otherwise
would be unlikely to have very much meaningful contact
with people from other backgrounds. The nature of the
Programme, as discussed below, places great faith in
the spirit and capacity of people and, whilst the extent
of transformation seen in this story does not occur in
every project, we have seen that Near Neighbours as a
whole has a distinctive, transformative impact in local
areas.
Relational Working: Beyond the Usual Suspects
A common criticism of interfaith and multifaith work
is that its effectiveness is hampered by an inability to
reach people who are not already involved in similar
work. From our experience, Near Neighbours has a
distinctive ability to reach people who have never
been involved in this type of work before, as well as
connecting and enhancing the work of those who have.
Much of the Programme’s distinctiveness lies in the role
of the local coordinator who is usually someone with
an extensive knowledge of and network in the local
area, provided with a flexible remit to create change
and connect with people using the tools and profile
of Near Neighbours. From shadowing a sub-group of
coordinators, we have seen how deeply their work and
that of the Programme is embedded in local areas; the
networks, connections, understanding and passion of
local coordinators raises the impact of the Programme
significantly.

We have seen coordinators – sometimes on the same
day – meet with community workers, Bishops, Members
of Parliament, representatives of Mosques, Synagogues
and Gurdwaras, local authority officers as well as
provide direct support to individual members of the
community who are getting to grips with filling in
funding forms for the first time. They have a unique
role in joining up existing work and providing as much
support and encouragement as necessary to help
newcomers to community development and multifaith
work to get started and become leaders. Coordinators
are the face of Near Neighbours in the local area and
all have distinctive abilities in building people’s capacity
to create change.
The Coventry University team met several recipients
of Near Neighbours small grants who had never put in
a grant application before and, according to them,
would not have done so were it not for the openness
of the Programme to a wide circle of applicants and
the support and connections of local coordinators and
partners. This has the important effect of building new
connections in local areas and increasing the potential
social capital ceiling of an area by involving more
people.
Adding Value: Intelligent, Locally-integrated Support
Central to Near Neighbours is its unique operating
structure which focuses on locally-relevant, small-
scale activity, much of which is commissioned at a
national level, allowing the Programme to respond to
neighbourhood-level needs whilst operating within a
broader collective framework.
Due to its relational way of working, as epitomised by
the work of the local coordinators, there is a common
understanding within the Programme that Near
Neighbours does not exist in a vacuum and is often
working within a complex context of local service
provision and community politics. The skill of the local
coordinators in foreseeing how the Programme’s support
can be more useful and relevant to the local context,
whilst still delivering against its aims, is central to its
success.
One example is the group of women from different faith
groups in a deprived area of the Black Country who
wanted to come together to learn basic business skills
so they could start an enterprise to sell their sewing
products online. They had secured a venue, a teacher
and a group of willing learners but could not find or
afford childcare; Near Neighbours was able to respond
to the situation by funding a crèche for a few hours
per week which enabled the project to go ahead. As a
result, the women met each week to learn about how to
get their business idea off the ground leading to them
forming an enterprise between them, continuing their
interaction after the project had ended and generating
income to support their families. Other, traditional
grant programmes would have likely passed on this
opportunity because the crèche was not the main focus
of the activity. This example shows how the Programme’s
nuanced and intelligent way of working holds great
promise for making a difference to people and is
another part of what sets Near Neighbours apart from
traditional, large-scale grant programmes.
Spotlight on Near Neighbours Partners: The Feast
and Catalyst
Whilst the core focus of Coventry University’s work
was within the five case study areas, our approach
to working with Near Neighbours allowed us to have
varying levels of access to the work of some other actors
within the Programme. Here the understanding of the
impact of Near Neighbours is furthered by discussing the
role and work of two key national partners: The Feast
and Catalyst.
The Feast
As a Christian youth-work charity based in Birmingham,
the Feast has developed innovative and fun ways of
bringing together children from different faiths to create
understanding across cultural difference. The original
focus of the project was on bringing together Christian
and Muslim children near its base in Birmingham. By
joining forces with the Near Neighbours team, the
organisation has been able to increase its reach to work
with children from lots of other faiths and cultures and
expand their activity to other English towns and cities,
including their latest Near Neighbours work in Luton and
Bradford.
According to CEO Tim Fawssett, Near Neighbours has
made The Feast part of a movement of people all with
a similar ethos, dealing in a matter-of-fact way with
diversity in society. Tim believes that interfaith work can

sometimes feel quite lonely for those organising and
having an ‘energised community of people all with fresh
ideas and suggestions for how to do things better’ has
made a huge difference to the work of the organisation;
‘it’s a team effort where it feels like everyone’s pulling in
the same direction’.
The Feast works primarily with 11-16 year old children
from different faiths, bringing them together to explore
their faiths, create friendships and discuss things that
they care about in a positive way that avoids tension
and challenges people to reconsider their prejudices
and stereotypes. It is the only part of Near Neighbours
that expressly works with people under 16 years old,
complementing the work of Catalyst which works with
people aged 16+.
The Feast believes that children under the age of 16 are
often more open to discussions around diversity and
difference and to learning about other people’s beliefs
and backgrounds. The team there has witnessed the
power of giving young people the opportunity to meet
others who are different to them that they would not
ordinarily have. Equipping young people with the skills to
articulate their own beliefs and worldviews and explore
those of others in the most useful way makes them more
able and confident to challenge prejudice. The Feast
has seen ‘real benefits when young people go back to
their day-to-day lives and homes’ (Tim Fawssett, CEO)
and has collected a range of case studies which pay
testament to its transformative nature for the young
individuals that take part. These stories show that young
people not only leave The Feast’s events with a better
understanding of other people’s faiths but they also
feel more confident in what their own faith means and,
according to the case studies, are more willing to put
that into practice through social action projects with
people they have met at events.
The Feast has been part of Near Neighbours since the
Programme started and has seen the demand for its
services increase greatly as a result, now receiving
on average one new request for their work every
day. Being able to draw on the innovative methods
of dealing with difference, blended with the skills of
qualified and experienced youth workers offers a range
of benefits to the Near Neighbours Programme and
provides opportunities to reach an age group missed
by a great deal of other multifaith work. Being part of
the Near Neighbours Programme seems to have not only
permitted an investment of resource and confidence
into The Feast’s work, enabling it to grow in scope
and scale, it has put a collaboration of like-minded
organisations behind it, lifting its profile and reach to
that of a significant national organisation. Alongside
lots of hard work and enthusiasm from within The
Feast team, Near Neighbours has helped mobilise an
exemplar of good practice from one city and helped
make its unique approach, focus and set of skills
available in different places across England. As well
as being a success in its own right, The Feast is also a
strong example of the relational strengths of the Near
Neighbours approach.
Catalyst
Catalyst is an interactive leadership programme that
started as part of Near Neighbours in 2011, bringing
together young people between 16-30 years old to
take part in accredited training courses. The core aim
is to build relationships that enhance the potential
of individuals to transform their communities for the
better, with training and dialogue across the themes of
faith, identity and belonging; leadership; conflict and
power; and media and communication. The Programme
is based on values of mutual respect, trust and long
term cooperation. Catalyst is run as a four day course,
often in residential style, and is administered by Near
Neighbours practitioners across England.
A clear and unique strength of Catalyst is that much of the
course content is provided by a mixture of locally relevant
leaders, including local community activists, charity
workers and public sector managers, as well as national
experts in particular fields (high profile commentators,
academics, etc.). The Programme is currently under a
separate external evaluation process which will provide
a more in-depth understanding of its reach and impact.
From the feedback forms, our attendance of courses,
conversations with participants and case studies seen
during this piece of work, however, it seems to offer a
powerful, useful and rewarding experience for all involved.
From what the Coventry University team have seen,
delegates leave the course inspired to take an active part
in their community, with new relationships with people
from different faiths and backgrounds which are sustained
long after the course is completed.

Catalyst offers a range of skills development
opportunities that, without Near Neighbours, would not
be available for young people. The course is a strong
example of how Near Neighbours blends national-level
relationships with locally relevant delivery, using the
profile of Near Neighbours to give young people contact
with high-profile and nationally prominent experts and
locally important leaders. Alongside The Feast, Catalyst
provides Near Neighbours with the opportunity to work
in an in-depth, innovative and nuanced way with young
people, enabling them not only to take up leadership
roles in their local areas but to set an example of
how to live and work with people of other faiths and
backgrounds. The course is a flagship example of
the relational approach taken by Near Neighbours
and would not exist without the investment, skills and
relationships made possible by the Programme.
THE IMPACT OF NEAR
NEIGHBOURS: INFORMING
THE EVALUATIVE
FRAMEWORK
As well as developing an understanding of what the
impact of Near Neighbours is, the fieldwork period also
had the aims of developing a clear understanding of
the aims and values of Near Neighbours and mapping
existing practices and attitudes towards evaluation within
the five case sites. The aim of this section is to show
how the findings from this fieldwork inform an evaluative
framework for Near Neighbours, presented thematically.
Existing Evaluation
The first of these findings and one that provided a strong
foundation for the Coventry University team’s work is that
a genuine appetite for evaluation exists within the Near
Neighbours Programme. There is a clear interest from
the Near Neighbours central staff and Evaluation Group
members in understanding if the Programme is achieving
its aims, or at least working towards doing so, and also
to highlight areas that can be replicated, improved upon
or refined to strengthen the success of Near Neighbours
wherever viable. In a similar vein, coordinators are proud
and confident in their progress and success in local areas
and would value a system that enables them to capture
the impact of their work (and therefore that of Near
Neighbours).
A caveat here is that this desire for evaluation must be
‘done right’. Those taking part in the fieldwork were clear
that measuring success and enabling continuous learning
is important and should take place but that evaluation
and monitoring for the sake of it is not desirable
and is perceived as a mistake made by many other
organisations. This aligns well with the aforementioned
desire of the Near Neighbours Evaluation Group for
any evaluation and monitoring system to be not unduly
bureaucratic and burdensome.
The confidence that coordinators hold in their impact
being linked to the aims of the Near Neighbours
Programme and being of paramount social importance
was clearly observed in all areas visited. Some
coordinators, however, were concerned that a future
evaluative exercise could turn into one which is very
target driven and in which the performance of different
areas is compared and ranked. The concern here is
that, from the perspective of local teams, all the Near
Neighbours areas work in different ways, work within
different demographic, political and faith contexts
and have different needs and aspirations. The nature
of Near Neighbours as a programme with a very strong
local focus, designed to be responsive to grassroots
need rather than implementing a prescriptive, top-down
agenda, means that establishing uniform metrics that
are used as performance indicator measures would
negatively impact on the ethos of the Programme.
Although some form of uniform measures and metrics can
be applied, local areas should not be directly compared
to one another in relation to performance on any specific
indicator.
Evaluation and monitoring activity for elements of
Near Neighbours’ work currently takes place across the
Programme. As described elsewhere in this report, there
is a thorough and successful approach to ensuring that
there is clear, up-to-date knowledge on the progress of
funded projects and one that enables basic evaluative
data to be collected. One finding here, however, was
that, although local area teams were collecting very
similar required basic data, they were not all collecting
the same data in the same way. This made aggregating
records into larger datasets challenging and did lead to

some small but not key gaps in the data. Later in
this document, this finding is addressed through a
demonstration of how the tools developed have allowed
a more standardised data collection approach to be
piloted and then implemented.
Shared Understanding, Vision and Purpose
A further key finding was that there was a strong
and common understanding at all levels – from
coordinators to the Programme leadership - as to
what Near Neighbours aims to achieve and what its
ethos and approach is: an important prerequisite to
the successful implementation of work such as this.
Two interlinked elements of the work, the importance
of which were repeatedly emphasised, were the role
of working ‘sustainably’ and ‘locally’. Here the ethos of
the Programme at all levels seems to be that providing
support to groups which can sustain their community
activities beyond their interaction with Near Neighbours
is a key focus. Related to this, there is a strong
recognition that activities delivered in local areas that
are led by people from those areas enhances potential
sustainability as well as growing the potential impact
and legacy of each action. The importance of fostering
ongoing relationships between individuals and groups
is seen as vital to Near Neighbours and something that
relates heavily to the idea of very local delivery by
people who, as one team member put it, “are going to
bump into each other in the supermarket”.
Linked to this we found that there exists a shared
understanding of what social interaction and social
action are, why they are important and how the
Programme is contributing to them. What seems equally
important, however, is that, particularly in the case of
the local coordinators, Near Neighbours representatives
are able to articulate these broad aims in different
ways that are relevant to respective local contexts. For
example, in some areas, social action was seen primarily
as a means of bringing people together to address
issues of prejudice against particular faiths and cultures
– particularly in areas where extremism and division
have significant prominence - whereas in other areas
the Programme was seen as a means of enhancing the
capacity of faith organisations to work with other faiths
to the end of alleviating poverty and disadvantage.
From our experience, we see this balance between aims
that are shared between partners but applied in ways
which are relevant to local needs as a key strength of
the Programme.
The Role of Coordinators
As discussed in greater detail above, time spent with
the area hubs also gave insight into the importance of
the role of local coordinators in the Programme. The
distinctive role that coordinators play in facilitating
grassroots social action and social interaction
is absolutely central to the Programme. Without
coordinators being embedded in local communities,
Near Neighbours would lose its localised ethos and
much of its ‘relational’ approach and would revert
to being a much more centralised, small grants
programme. Without the support, encouragement
and input of coordinators, it is also likely that such
a small grants programme would only attract those
with experience of applying for funding rather than
finding and encouraging those new to social action. An
evaluative framework which places emphasis on these
roles within Near Neighbours seems key to successfully
capturing the work of Near Neighbours.
A Diversity of Activity
A clear distinctive feature of Near Neighbours is the
range of activity that is funded and the wide variety
of ways that the Programme catalyses local social
action and interaction. The array of activity that the
Coventry University team have seen includes community
gardening, football clubs, multifaith work with homeless
people, entrepreneur classes, coffee mornings, women’s
group, World War One commemorations, interfaith open
days, Museum exhibitions, community dialogue events,
community planning workshops, leadership programmes
and much more. This provides a great deal of flexibility
in the Programme and, alongside the easily accessible
grant process, seems to make it very attractive to
community organisers. For evaluation, however,
this presents a number of challenges to consider in
appreciating the heterogeneity of the work as well as
being to track progress across the Programme.
Much More Than Grants
It was repeatedly emphasised by local and central staff
that Near Neighbours is about more than just the grants
programme. This had been recognised by the Coventry
University team from the outset of the work but the
emphasis of this within the fieldwork warrants note as it

speaks volumes about the ethos of the Programme;
it aspires to be, and is, much more significant and
extensive than a small grants scheme. This is one of
the distinguishing characteristics of the Programme
and one which must be picked up by the evaluation
and monitoring tools. To focus solely on small grants
is to ignore a large and important proportion of the
Programme.
Catalyst
One obvious example of how the how Near Neighbours
is more than a small grants programme is its young
leader’s training programme, Catalyst, of which there is
currently no systematic evaluation or monitoring related
to impact and effectiveness. The numbers and views of
Catalyst alumni are recorded upon course completion
by course administrators; there is, however, no system
or process in place that records any longer-term impact
of courses. Beyond anecdotal evidence (where the
Programme appears to have had strong success in
some areas) there is currently no systematic recording
showing whether or not Catalyst alumni:
• apply for Near Neighbours funding;
• apply for any funding to promote social action or
social interaction in their local area;
• take on any positions of leadership within their
community;
• continue to stay in contact with other alumni.
Though Catalyst is highly regarded by both coordinators
and alumni as being an important programme for giving
young people the skills, confidence and connections in
their local area to enable them to promote social action
and social interaction, it is difficult to assess the impact
of the Programme systematically or empirically without
data related to these outcomes. The Coventry University
team share the view of the Near Neighbours Evaluation
Group that the Catalyst Programme has shown strengths
and impact during a phase of rapid growth since
inception. In order to promote continuous learning with
regards to the operation of the Programme and to be
able to better measure outcomes in the future, a further
evaluation and monitoring exercise is currently taking
place, focusing specifically on Catalyst.
Fieldwork Conclusions for the Evaluative Framework
Time spent ‘in the field’ with the Near Neighbours team
and a range of stakeholders provided an essential
backdrop to the context within which the evaluation
system will operate, as well as demonstrating to the
Coventry University team the approach, ethos and
distinctiveness of Near Neighbours from the perspective
of those closest to it. The work presented in subsequent
sections of this report is based heavily on the
experiences and key findings presented here, including
a refreshing appetite for evaluation, the importance of
local contexts, the commonality of aims, the diversity of
Near Neighbours activity, the nuanced approach and
relational ethos and the importance of the role of the
local coordinator in all Near Neighbours work.

As introduced above, from time spent working with
people in local areas, the Coventry University team
found a strong degree of commonality in the aims
and ambitions of each part of the Programme as well
as an appetite to collect more data on performance
and impact. As discussed in previous sections, Near
Neighbours is characterised by work in changing and
challenging local contexts, tackling issues that are
complex and difficult to measure. The remit of this work
is to provide an evaluative framework which records
activity and progress without significantly increasing the
workload of the Near Neighbours team on the ground.
The key to this work, therefore, was to synthesise
fieldwork findings into key themes which encapsulate
the core elements of Near Neighbours work, organise
those themes in a way that shows how they relate to
each other and demonstrate how they each fit with
current and possible data collection. To achieve this,
the team developed a conceptual framework which
underpins the approach to monitoring and evaluation.
This is presented and discussed below.
FIVE KEY THEMES
FOR EVALUATING AND
MONITORING NEAR
NEIGHBOURS
Social Interaction and Social Action
The first two themes stem from the ideas that are
fundamental to Near Neighbours and are a key part of
a repeated epithet running throughout the Programme’s
communication and engagement work: bringing
people so that they can get to know each other better
and improve their local areas. It was felt across the
Programme that it is these two areas of work which
give Near Neighbours its distinctiveness; there are
programmes which bring different faiths and cultures
together and programmes which aim to transform local
neighbourhoods but doing both simultaneously within a
mutually reinforcing approach is a distinctive strength
of Near Neighbours. The ability for tools to capture and
report progress and activity in this area is therefore
essential.
Leadership
There is a clear belief throughout Near Neighbours that
developing the capacity of leaders, particularly young
leaders, to address the challenges in local areas and
work effectively across faiths and cultures is essential to
strengthening relationships and increasing social action.
The clearest commitment to this is through Catalyst. As
discussed in previous section, a more comprehensive
evaluation of Catalyst will begin in 2016, leading to tools
which will complement those presented in this report.
Sustainability
Across Near Neighbours there is a commitment to not
just encouraging people, groups and organisations to
begin work in social action and social interaction but to
ensuring that that work continues after the involvement
of Near Neighbours. Applying a relational model of
working allows the Near Neighbours team to connect
actors to the support and work of other in their local
areas and to alternative funding streams. Sustainability
is therefore a vital part of the picture and collecting
data on how sustainable the projects are is key to
understanding Near Neighbours’ success.
Local Action
The idea of working locally is central to the Near
Neighbours approach. Fieldwork findings showed that
coordinators are essential to the approach and have
developed strong networks and connections in local
areas. As described in earlier sections, a clear ambition
for Near Neighbours is to bring people together to
build strong relationships between them; it is felt that
people who live, work and are invested in the local area
are more likely to continue relationships made through
Near Neighbours activities. This part of the conceptual
framework therefore takes the view that work in local
areas, involving and led by people from those areas,
is an effective way of working; capturing the extent to
which Near Neighbours works in this way is therefore
important.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

19 Conceptual Framework
VISUALISING EVALUATION:
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
DIAGRAM
The above five themes are all important to recording the
progress of Near Neighbours individually; they are also
related to each other and are mutually reinforcing. The
diagram below organises these themes to give an idea
of the relationship between them. Within the diagram,
social action and social interaction are seen as the
two key themes for Near Neighbours. Reinforcing and
feeding in to work in these two areas are the themes
of local action, sustainability and leadership. All five
themes are seen as contributing to the aim of Good
Neighbours and Great Neighbourhoods, discussed
further in subsequent sections of this report.

COLLECTING DATA AND
EVIDENCE
In order to operationalise the above framework, each
theme is linked to a group of indicators that bring
together data from across the Programme to illustrate
progress in that area of work. The tools discussed later
in this report have been designed to capture data
against these indicators. The indicators selected are as
follows:
Groups of Indicators
Social Action
• Number of people taking part in local social action projects
• Number of people involved in leading projects
• Number of volunteer hours, shown in monetary terms (£ x no. hours)
Social
Interaction
• Number of new faith-based organisations involved in multifaith activity or delivering
projects with other faiths
• Number of people engaged in multifaith activity
• No. of visits by coordinators to groups, building relationships and capacity
Leadership
• Number of Catalyst graduates
• Number of Catalyst graduates that have started projects after graduation
• Number of Catalyst graduates that have applied for Near Neighbours funding
• Number of Catalyst graduates that have remained in regular contact with fellow
graduates after 1 month, 6 months and 1 year
Sustainability
• Number of projects that have continued multifaith or interfaith work together after the
project
• Number of projects that have received non-Near Neighbours funding for further
multifaith work
• Number of groups that have been supported by the Near Neighbours team to sustain
their work after funding
Local Action
• Number of projects delivered by locally embedded organisations and people
• Number of projects attracting local media profile

21 Theory of Change
This section presents a theory of change for the work
of Near Neighbours. The diagram and accompanying
explanation that follow are products of a process
involving a range of key stakeholders from across Near
Neighbours, including coordinators from across the
country, interns, representatives of national partners
including The Feast, The Council of Christians and
Jews and the Nehemiah Foundation and staff from
Near Neighbours central office in London, including
the Programme Director. The process brought together
stakeholders for a one-day workshop, facilitated by
the Coventry University team, to reflect upon and map
out how Near Neighbours creates change. Whilst this
was an excellent opportunity to allow those closest to
Near Neighbours delivery to discuss their experiences
and thoughts on its progress, developing the Theory
of Change also provided the opportunity for the
Coventry University team to further test the thinking
behind the conceptual framework discussed earlier
in this document, thereby enhancing the work of the
evaluation. An explanation of what the Theory of
Change approach is can be found in Appendix 1 of this
document.
A THEORY OF CHANGE
FOR NEAR NEIGHBOURS
This section explores the three key elements of the
Theory of Change developed for Near Neighbours: the
aim, intermediate outcomes and activities. Images taken
from the Theory of Change diagram are used throughout
as the basis for the explanation, with the whole diagram
presented at the end.
Aim: An Overarching Vision for Near Neighbours
“GOOD NEIGHBOURS
AND GREAT
NEIGHBOURHOODS”
As a starting point for the process, the 14 people attending
the workshop were asked to describe an overarching aim
for Near Neighbours: the key problem that it aims to tackle
or a societal goal that it is working towards. Split into three
groups, delegates presented the following three ‘aims’ for
consideration.
• Safe, empowered, flourishing and resilient
neighbourhoods for all people
• Thriving neighbourhoods that meet, work and achieve
together
• Strong, connected and resilient communities
confident in their diversity and their collective ability to
bring about positive change
The role of the facilitators throughout the workshop and
afterwards was one of synthesis: taking the outputs of
all delegates, drawing out commonalities and areas of
consensus and contradiction and distilling these down
into a Theory of Change. Within this context, the above
aims from the three respective groups align well with
each other. Each uses similar words to describe who the
change relates to or where it will be seen (neighbourhoods
and communities) as well as similar adjectives for
the characteristics of successful neighbourhoods/
communities (for example: flourishing, resilient, thriving
and strong). Furthermore, they each contain an element
of the collective within their descriptions: ‘for all people’,
‘together’ and ‘collective ability’.
As discussed previously, one of the purposes of the
workshop was to test the thinking behind the evaluation
tools developed in the project. When related back to the
ideas in the conceptual framework discussed in previous
sections, there is a great deal of commonality between
these descriptions and the overarching aim of the
framework: Good Neighbours and Great Neighbourhoods.
There was consensus within the workshop that, for the
sake of brevity, this description could be used as effective
shorthand for the values and meanings provided by the
fuller depictions above. It should be recognised, therefore,
that whilst the Theory of Change takes ‘Good Neighbours
and Great Neighbourhoods’ as its aim, this represents
more nuanced, richer and more diverse descriptions of
the aim from across the Programme. Commonality in aims
is central to an effective theory of change; providing
a degree of freedom for interpretation of the aim for
individuals’ practice is vital for successful implementation.
THEORY OF CHANGE

Outcomes: The Intermediate Changes Near
Neighbours Creates
Outcomes within a theory of change describe
intermediate changes and progress themselves but
crucially are seen as the necessary precursors to
achieving the overarching aim. For Good Neighbours
and Great Neighbourhoods, the Near Neighbours Theory
of Change clearly outlines that three things need to
happen: more people work together to improve their
local area, communities become more resilient and
confident and relationships between people in general
become stronger. From the workshop, from working
closely with the Near Neighbours team and from many
of the available descriptions of Near Neighbours’ work,
three key themes have arisen in support of achieving
those outcomes:
• Social Action – people becoming engaged in
improving their local areas and tackling social
causes, including through volunteering and
community leadership
• Social Interaction – people from different faiths and
cultures come together to learn about each other,
work collaboratively and create ‘association’ and
ongoing relationships with each other
• Trust – people having faith, confidence and belief in
the abilities and intentions of each other, leading to
positive and prosperous relationships
The diagram is able to show how these three key
elements that, as evidenced during Coventry University’s
fieldwork, sit at the heart of Near Neighbours are
mobilised to achieve the three necessary prerequisites:
Near Neighbours increases action, interaction and
trust so that people work together more, relationships
are stronger and communities are more resilient and
confident. The next outcome shows that enabling an
increase in the amount of multifaith action, and growing
and ensuring the effectiveness of that action, is a
vital precursor to the outcomes discussed above and
is therefore a central element of the Near Neighbours
approach. The nature of this change is discussed in
further detail below.
The above image shows that the next stage of outcomes
is split within three themes. The theory behind this
change within the framework is that for multifaith social
action to increase and become more effective, it needs:
1) leaders with the skills, knowledge and encouragement
to drive it forward; 2) the resource, reach and strength
of faith, faith groups and faith institutions, including the
Church of England, to be mobilised effectively; and 3)
for social action to be strategically relevant, effective
and sustainable. The diagram shows a range of more
specific outcomes which support each of those themes
to reach fruition which result from activities covered
below.
Theory of Change 22
GOOD NEIGHBOURS AND GREAT NEIGHBOURHOODS
More people of all faiths
and no faith work together
to improve their areas
More and stronger
relationships of trust
between people of different
faiths and no faith
Communities are more
resiliant to local change
and more confident in
facing local challenges
Multifaith social action increases and
projects become more sustainable,
strategic and effective
Increased Trust
Increased Action Increased Interaction

23 Theory of Change
The above image shows that the next stage of outcomes
is split within three themes. The theory behind this change
within the framework is that for multifaith social action
to increase and become more effective, it needs: 1)
leaders with the skills, knowledge and encouragement
to drive it forward; 2) the resource, reach and strength
of faith, faith groups and faith institutions, including the
Church of England, to be mobilised effectively; and 3) for
social action to be strategically relevant, effective and
sustainable. The diagram shows a range of more specific
outcomes which support each of those themes to reach
fruition which result from activities covered below.
Activities: What the Near Neighbours Team Do
The final part of this presentation details the activities
of Near Neighbours and how they relate to a set of
immediate outcomes. During the Theory of Change
workshop, an array of activities was discussed by
delegates, showing a great diversity of work happening
at every level and with every partner. The Theory of
Change diagram makes sense of this diversity by using
six groupings, each of which is discussed below, using
examples to illustrate the type and breadth of work
undertaken and an explanation of the direct outcomes
resulting from each type of activity. The activities are not
separated by partner, project or job role, recognising that
each element of the Programme is likely to contribute to
multiple types of activity.
Increased Trust
Mobilising Faith
More effective use of Church resources and
a stronger role for local faith groups and
insitutions as agents of change and support
Enabling Sustainable Action
Groups have the necessary
support, networks and resoures to
lead effective social action
Empowering Local Leaders
More people have the skills, knowledge,
confidence and initial funding to bring people
together and lead effective social action
Local groups work
more and more
effectively with
each other and
local organisations
Increased profile
of the role of
faith groups and
institutions in the
local community
The effectiveness
of Near
Neighbours’ work
continues to
increase over time
People are more
able to access
funding and
support for local
action
Increased
awareness of
the power of
multifaith work in
local areas
More people are
more prepared to
lead community
projects in their
local area
Individuals are
supported and more
able to live and
work with people
from other faiths
Local groups work
more and more
effectively with
each other and
local organisations
Increased profile
of the role of
faith groups and
institutions in the
local community
The effectiveness
of Near
Neighbours’ work
continues to
increase over time
People are more
able to access
funding and
support for local
action
Increased
awareness of
the power of
multifaith work in
local areas
More people are
more prepared to
lead community
projects in their
local area
Individuals are
supported and more
able to live and
work with people
from other faiths
Building networks
between local
actors and across
faith groups
Forging links to
local services and
wider sources
of funding and
support
Local and national
evaluation and
monitoring
Leading by
example:
Promoting positive
local multifaith
work
Providing
targeted funding
for local projects
across the country
Delivering training
in social action
leadership and
working across faiths
and communities

Activity Type 1: Building networks between local actors
and across faith groups
Near Neighbours is described by many as taking a
‘relational’ approach which succeeds through embedded
work at the local level, committing resource and energy
to building relationships with and between people and
organisations. The benefits of this approach are, from the
Coventry University team’s experience of Near Neighbours
and perspectives from across the Programme’s staff,
multiple and varied. Within the lens of Theory of Change,
however, the most important, direct outcome from this
approach is the enabling of people to work more and more
effectively with each other and key organisations. Some
examples of specific work in this area are as follows.
• Using local knowledge to facilitate contact between
groups and people across local areas.
• Supporting, visiting and promoting projects.
• Building relationships with local groups and actors to
understand their needs.
• Building the capacity of people to apply for funding.
• Facilitating and organising local events to bring people
together for action.
Activity Type 2: Forging links to local services and wider
sources of funding
Connected to the relational approach discussed above,
Near Neighbours places clear emphasis on linking
community-level action with existing local services and
other sources of funding, leading to more people accessing
funding and other types of local support for their activities
and more effective joint-working in local areas. The
outcome from this is that, wherever possible, social action
that begins with support from Near Neighbours is connected
and supported locally and, thus, has a greater chance of
sustainability. Work in this area includes the following.
• Brokering relationships between the work of Near
Neighbours and that of other local, strategic actors –
charities, Universities, public sector agencies, etc.
• Signposting people to local organisations for support,
guidance and encouragement.
• Building relationships with Churches and other faith
organisations.
• Signposting and promoting sources of funding.
Activity Type 3: Local and national evaluation and
monitoring
Core evaluation and monitoring activity has been a part
of Near Neighbours since its inception, developing and
changing with the Programme. This activity will further
increase in scale and significance within Near Neighbours
as a result of this evaluation project, strengthening the
focus on recording performance data, reporting success
and learning from experience. As shown by the Theory of
Change diagram, evaluation and monitoring activity seeks
to enhance the effectiveness of Near Neighbours work over
time and should therefore be seen as a core activity of the
Programme. Some examples of evaluation and monitoring
activity are as follows.
• Collecting impact data from projects.
• National grant monitoring data collection.
• Reporting of data to funders and other stakeholders.
• Recording and reporting local monitoring data,
including log books.
• Developing case studies and sharing experiences with
Near Neighbours colleagues.
Activity Type 4: Leading by example: promoting positive
local multifaith work
All delegates within the Theory of Change workshop
discussed promotion and communication as a part of their
role. There were, however, questions over how exactly it
contributed to the aims of Near Neighbours and how it
created change. After discussion it became clear that the
key purpose was to increase the profile of multifaith work
and of faith groups in local social action. Delegates felt that
raising awareness with wider society and specific groups,
such as politicians and faith leaders, amplifies and expands
the impact of projects and provides a much stronger
legacy for the work, thereby adding significant value to
local multifaith action. A clear strength of Near Neighbours
is to take small-scale, local action and connect it with
much larger, locally and nationally significant movements,
enhancing it in many different ways. Examples of promotion
and communication work undertaken across the Programme
are as follows.
• Social media campaigns and account ‘take-overs’.
• Turning project successes into case studies.
• Blogging and the Near Neighbours website.
• Organising and authoring local and national media
coverage.
• Profile raising within local and national political,
government, civil society and faith circles.
Theory of Change 24

25 Theory of Change
Activity Type 5: Providing targeted funding for local
projects across England
The ability to use targeted funding to encourage
and catalyse local leaders into action is central to
the Near Neighbours approach and is directly linked
to the outcome of people being more prepared and
empowered to become active in improving their local
area. When placed in combination with the relational
approach to working – bringing people together,
brokering relationships and connecting local activities
– it is a powerful tool for sparking community activity
which can then be sustained and supported locally.
Some examples of work related to funding are as
follows.
• Funding a range of local community activity through
the national grant programme.
• Local promotion of grants.
• Bringing people together to turn ideas in action and
applications.
• Providing face-to-face support to applicants.
Activity Type 6: Delivering training in social
action leadership and working across faiths and
communities
Leadership is a clear theme within the Near Neighbours
Theory of Change. By investing in the capacity and
capabilities of local leaders, with a particular focus on
young leaders, the Programme is not only increasing the
preparedness of people in local areas to lead social
action but is enhancing their ability to work across faiths
and cultures sensitively and effectively. Some examples
of this type of work area as follows.
• Leadership training programmes.
• Training and encouraging people to apply for
funding.
• Training people in project management and delivery.
• Helping people to understand key fundraising ideas
such as value for money and sustainability.
THEORY OF CHANGE
DIAGRAM
The full diagram is included opposite and can be seen in
a more interactive and easier to navigate mode on the
Prezi website, via this link.
Adding Outputs: Near Neighbours Theory of Change
and Conceptual Framework
One of the benefits of developing a theory of change
is that, by mapping out the intermediate, smaller
impacts of work and their relationship with larger
goals, there is greater clarity over where changes,
progress and performance can be measured. Whilst
there is recognition that not all change can be
measured or systematically monitored, particularly in
programmes tackling complex social issues such as
Near Neighbours, the Theory of Change highlights that
many of the activities and outcomes do have tangible
and measurable outputs associated with them. In
this respect, the Theory of Change and conceptual
framework discussed earlier work hand-in-glove.
The process of developing the Theory of Change
for Near Neighbours has strongly validated the five
key themes which form the basis of the conceptual
framework and has provided further insight into how
they work together to create change and contribute
to the Near Neighbours’ aim. As discussed above,
leadership and sustainability make up two prominent
pathways of outcomes which lead directly to an
increase in the amount and effectiveness of multifaith
activity. The Theory of Change shows that social action
and social interaction are two necessary prerequisites
for stronger relationships and more confident and
resilient communities, as well as having a relationship
with ‘trust’. Finally, the concept of local work is
embedded throughout each stage of the theory of
change: Near Neighbours is locally embedded, activity
is led by well-prepared, local leaders and change takes
place in local neighbourhoods.

Theory of Change 26
GOOD NEIGHBOURS AND GREAT NEIGHBOURHOODS
More people of all faiths
and no faith work together
to improve their areas
More and stronger
relationships of trust
between people of different
faiths and no faith
Communities are more
resiliant to local change
and more confident in
facing local challenges
Increased Trust
Mobilising Faith
More effective use of Church resources and
a stronger role for local faith groups and
insitutions as agents of change and support
Enabling Sustainable Action
Groups have the necessary
support, networks and resoures to
lead effective social action
Empowering Local Leaders
More people have the skills, knowledge,
confidence and initial funding to bring people
together and lead effective social action
Local groups work
more and more
effectively with
each other and
local organisations
Increased profile
of the role of
faith groups and
institutions in the
local community
The effectiveness
of Near
Neighbours’ work
continues to
increase over time
People are more
able to access
funding and
support for local
action
Increased
awareness of
the power of
multifaith work in
local areas
More people are
more prepared to
lead community
projects in their
local area
Individuals are
supported and more
able to live and
work with people
from other faiths
Building networks
between local
actors and across
faith groups
Forging links to
local services and
wider sources
of funding and
support
Local and national
evaluation and
monitoring
Leading by
example:
Promoting positive
local multifaith
work
Providing
targeted funding
for local projects
across the country
Delivering training
in social action
leadership and
working across faiths
and communities
The process of developing the Theory of Change
for Near Neighbours has strongly validated the five
key themes which form the basis of the conceptual
framework and has provided further insight into how
they work together to create change and contribute
to the Near Neighbours’ aim. As discussed above,
leadership and sustainability make up two prominent
pathways of outcomes which lead directly to an
increase in the amount and effectiveness of multifaith
activity. The Theory of Change shows that social action
and social interaction are two necessary prerequisites
for stronger relationships and more confident and
resilient communities, as well as having a relationship
with ‘trust’. Finally, the concept of local work is
embedded throughout each stage of the theory of
change: Near Neighbours is locally embedded, activity
is led by well-prepared, local leaders and change takes
place in local neighbourhoods.

27 Theory of Change
The conceptual framework demonstrates that data
is available to record activity in these five themes,
demonstrating that, in specific areas, the change
described in the Theory of Change is happening in
reality; vice versa, the Theory of Change shows that
these five themes have clear and logical relationships
with much less tangible and more difficult to record
concepts such as trust, resilience, confidence and
association. In this respect, there is a clear, mutually
reinforcing relationship between the Theory of Change
and the conceptual framework; the former shows how
change happens, the latter shows how to record data
associated with that change.
THEORY OF CHANGE
CONCLUSION
Developing a Near Neighbours Theory of Change,
although an addition to the original proposal, has been
an insightful and useful endeavour for the process
of developing an evaluation system, allowing the
Coventry University team to test the thinking behind
their work. Judging from highly positive feedback from
workshop delegates, the process has been a positive
experience for the Near Neighbours team in providing
an opportunity to reflect on how a complex and far-
reaching programme works as a whole to create
change. Theories of change work best when they are
embedded within and evolve with the programme
they describe; our recommendation is for the Near
Neighbours Theory of Change to be used within every
level of the Programme and for its logic to be regularly
challenged, tested and revisited.

The fieldwork findings and conceptual framework,
alongside the desire for a “Collective Impact-like” approach
demonstrate that a variety of metrics and measurements,
both qualitative and quantitative, should be used to capture
the outputs of Near Neighbours. This section details the
tools that have been developed and links them back to
the team’s fieldwork findings and conceptual framework.
The section then uses real data generated in five Near
Neighbours areas to use the tools to show the impact of the
Near Neighbours Programme. The evaluation and monitoring
tools are as follows:
STANDARDISED DATA
SPREADSHEET
An already piloted and implemented evaluation tool from
this work is the Standardised Data Spreadsheet. This sheet
is completed by both the central Near Neighbours team
and local coordinators. When a small grant is awarded, the
central team complete basic details of the award such as
the name of the recipient, the date and the region. As the
project progresses, more details are recorded at local level,
including the demographics and faith backgrounds of those
involved.
This spreadsheet builds on data capture methods already
used in a non-standardised format across the Programme
and makes some additions to capture additional elements
of social action and social interaction which were not
previously recorded, in line with the conceptual framework.
The Standardised Data Spreadsheet was piloted in June
2015 with data retrospectively added from April 1st 2015 so
as to fit with the financial year; this has been kept up-to-
date since. Coordinators surveyed were happy with the
content and did not feel that it was an unduly onerous
task to complete it; the similarity to previous forms of data
collection was felt to have aided this. Uptake did not,
however, reach 100% as the spreadsheet was sent out in an
online format with a view to real-time data being available
to the central team. This format was not something that
some coordinators were comfortable or familiar with using
and it also relied on having internet access at the time that
data was updated. This was not always felt to be practically
viable.
Pertinent to measuring levels of social action and social
interaction (it also covers more basic administrative data,
to avoid duplication of processes) the Standardised Data
Spreadsheet records:
• Number of people taking part in local social action
projects;
• Number of people involved in leading projects;
• Number of volunteer hours, shown in monetary terms
(£/hour x no. hours);
• Number of people engaged in multifaith activity;
• Number of project delivered by locally embedded
organisations and people.
In addition to this, the Coventry University team suggested
the idea of a formal quarterly evaluation session being held
in each local area for those small grant recipients whose
projects had finished in the previous quarter. This would
provide coordinators with the chance to gather additional
feedback on what worked well and what did not, as well
as providing the opportunity to capture some additional or
more medium-term outcomes. These sessions also would
have the dual benefit of bringing together a cohort of grant
recipients, all of whom are local to the area and have an
interest in community and voluntary work; this would further
increase social interaction and the potential for more work
to take place. Acknowledgement of recipients being invited
to these sessions is included as a field on the Standardised
Data Spreadsheet.
COORDINATOR LOGBOOK
The second evaluative tool is the Coordinator Logbook. This
was developed later in the process, in consultation with
coordinators to enable them capture the work that they
do in promoting social action and social interaction – this
work is currently either not recorded or is under-reported.
For instance, not all would-be small grants applicants that
coordinators work with end up submitting an application to
Near Neighbours and not every connection between groups
that a coordinator makes ends up in Near Neighbours
related work, even if it results in an increase in local social
action and/or local social interaction.
THE TOOLS AND USING THEM TO
CAPTURE IMPACT

29 The Tools and Using Them to Capture Impact
The logbook is designed to be simple to use and not
overly time consuming. Coordinators simply log:
1. When a new initial contact is made;
2. When they have supported a project;
3. When they are involved in partnership working;
4. When a new interaction is established.
Pertinent to measuring levels of social action and social
interaction the logbook records:
• Number of visits by coordinators to groups, building
relationships and capacity
• Number of projects attracting local media profile
Coordinators all keep their own diaries, both on and
offline, so much of this data is already recorded but not
used more widely to inform monitoring and evaluation.
Those involved in the development of the logbook felt
that it would address under-reporting of their work and
help them to showcase better what it is that they do
without it being too onerous a task.
CASE STUDY SYSTEM
A key part of capturing the impact and progress of
Near Neighbours is in the stories of change, success
and transformation. Capturing the diversity of activity
and impact of Near Neighbours, as well as enabling the
Programme to record and learn from experience, has
been a key focus for the Coventry University team. As a
result, a case study system has been created to enable
anyone working with or within the Near Neighbours team
to capture a Near Neighbours story that they would like
to share with others.
The system is designed to allow the user to choose
the way in which they would like to record and
communicate the story by selecting one of the following
template types. A range of templates and questions
are available, allowing case studies to take different
forms including: individual reflections on how they
experienced something and what they learned; the
whole background and narrative of a project; a short
description of the key points; a brief introduction,
or the elements required for a blog or press article.
There is also the option to add questions at the end of
each case study, allowing the user to personalise the
template for each story.
Case studies can be written from the perspective of first
person (We, I, etc.) or third person (he, she, it, they, etc.)
and can be about almost anything that the user thinks
is worthy of note or would like to share with others. This
could include:
• funded projects, events or meetings;
• whole areas or elements of the Programme such as
Catalyst or regions;
• lessons and ideas to inform future work;
• partnerships and relationships between people,
groups and organisations;
• the contributions of individuals such as volunteers or
members of the community;
• stories of transformation in which Near Neighbours
was a part of the picture such as changes in local
areas, success stories of organisations, a difference
in the lives of individuals or groups, etc.
They can be used to capture something that went well,
to record reflections on how something could have
gone better and to inform colleagues and partners of
what has been happening in Near Neighbours areas.
Complementing the numbers and breadth captured in
other monitoring data, the system has been designed to
capture some of the deeper, more substantial impact
that Near Neighbours is having in local areas and across
England as well as to allow the team to learn from their
experiences as they go.
1. Suggestion Box
2. Case in Brief
3. Quick Debrief
4. Problem-Solution
5. What, So What and Now What
6. Individual Reflection on the Process
7. Project Impact Summary
8. The Whole Story
9. Case for Press Release
10. 1Build Your Own Template

CATALYST EVALUATION
The Catalyst Programme is a key part of the wider
Near Neighbours Programme and makes up most of the
leadership element within the conceptual framework. To
begin to measure the medium to long-term impacts of
Catalyst with regards to social action and social interaction,
the tools propose capturing the following data:
• Number of Catalyst graduates.
• Number of Catalyst graduates that have started
projects after graduation.
• Number of Catalyst graduates that have applied for
Near Neighbours funding.
• Number of Catalyst graduates that have remained in
regular contact with fellow graduates after 1 month, 6
months and 1 year.
Currently no standardised processes are in place to capture
this data; plans are in place, however, within the Near
Neighbours team to change this in 2016.
USING THE TOOLS AND
DEMONSTRATING IMPACT
This section showcases the tools in practical use and
gives examples of the impact that the Near Neighbours
Programme has had.
Standardised Data Spreadsheet
The Standardised Data Spreadsheet has been in use
in local areas and centrally since June 2015 with data
retrospectively filled in from 1st April 2015. This has allowed
for the collection of a meaningful-sized sample of data
with which to gauge the impact that the Near Neighbours
Programme has had and has also allowed for the process of
using the spreadsheet to become embedded and refined.
The data used in this report is accurate up to the week
commencing 22nd February 2016 and the key measurable
outputs here all relate to the small grants programme.
A local focus
A key feature of the Near Neighbours Programme is the
ambition to enable local action and empower local people
and groups with the opportunity to deliver projects in their
own neighbourhoods. The importance of this is something
that we have seen emphasised repeatedly in interviews
and fieldwork with both CUF staff and Near Neighbours
coordinators. Capturing data in relation to this central aim,
the spreadsheet tool records both the postcode data of
the person, group or organisation receiving a grant and the
postcode in which the project activity will be delivered.
This application of postcode data brings a range of benefits
in assessing whether or not work is happening locally.
Postcodes are a widely-accepted measure of locality
in both the social sciences and statistical analysis in the
UK, including playing a central role at the lowest level of
aggregation in the UK Census Data. Without any additional
investment required in data gathering for the Programme,
the postcode data provides Near Neighbours with a
consistent indicator of how much of its work is delivered
locally. Using this data, as shown in the table below, we
can see that the vast majority of small grants are enabling
local people and groups to deliver projects in their own
immediate area.
Near Neighbours Working Locally: Project Location Data
from 01/04/15 – 22/02/16
Area Name Percentage of projects where
the postcode of organisation
delivering and postcode of
delivery are an exact match
Birmingham 68
Black Country 73
Luton 81
West London 56
Yorkshire 69
As well as substantiating the claims made above, the
postcode data – particularly the area code (for example,
‘SW1P’) - also provides an ‘at-a-glance’ view of where
activity is taking place on a case-by-case basis. Analyses
of this data shows that it is the norm across the Programme
for small grants to be awarded for activity delivered in
either the same or a nearby postcode area code. The one
exception to this is in the West London area which is likely to
be due in part to the large area (in terms of both geography
and population) that is covered by Near Neighbours in this
region as well as the rather more opaque borders that exist
within London as opposed to other Near Neighbours area,

Near_Neighbours_Coventry_University_Evaluation (1)

Near_Neighbours_Coventry_University_Evaluation (1)

More Related Content

Near_Neighbours_Coventry_University_Evaluation (1)