4The 2005 CampaignUK Presidencies of EU & G8 (WTO, UN)Campaign: Aid, Debt, Trade Justice540 member coalitionNGOs, Trades Union, Students Union, Faith groups, UK Voluntary organisations, development education organisations & othersNGO-ledYear long programme of actionWhite Band Days, Edinburgh Rally (G8), TV, New media, Trade Justice Lobby, WTO (Live8?)Massive public awareness and participationBigger than anyone anticipated“Everyone knew that 2005 was a massive year for development campaigning in the UK”
5The Evaluation: Objectives and scope Evaluation questionsWhat progress did the coalition make against its objectives during 2005?What were the strengths and weaknesses of the coalition’s approach and set up?What lessons can be learned for the future?The coalition’s objectivesAchieve policy change in the areas of more and better aid, debt relief and trade justiceCreate an unstoppable momentum for change in 2005Leave the public committed to further change beyond 2005Two halvesImpactThe Policy change achievedThe impact of policy changePolicy change attributable to the campaignSomewhere in the middle – target focussed and participativeNeither journalism nor historyWays of workingCoalitionCommittee structureResources
6How we did it Governance Interview - based Commissioned by Co-ordination Team/BONDIndependent, externalReporting to Co-ordination TeamInterview - basedParticipative & AnonymousOver 70 in depth interviewsThree stream interview programmeInternal, External, Local CampaignersReview of internal documentationKey minutes, policy notes, briefing documentsReferencing existing quantitative researchLong term attitudes workAlongside other MPH evaluationsMedia (Metrica), New Media (Fairsay)
7Structure of evaluation 1.Progress against objectives2.Approach & Setup3.Lessons learnedBackgroundExternal PerceptionsLocal CampaignersWays of workingLessons LearnedNext StepsBackgroundHistoryKey momentsImpact on public, politics and policyReasons for impactOther observationsAchievementsPolicy changeCoalition workingConcernsImpact onUnity, mobilisation, decision-making, resolving tensionsReview of structuresLeadershipManaging relationships with others/ Govt/ PublicMessagesConsolidate/ Sustain in UKTradeGlobal mobilisation
8LimitationsStated in the evaluationAchieving a representative sample of opinionInternational impactReview of all communications activityDetailed long term impact on public awareness“Our approach has been deliberately participative. Rather than seek to offer a definite view, we have attempted to present the consensus of internal and external opinion.”On further reflection…Not embedded in processLack of reference points & metricsLack of consensus about what the evaluation was forNecessarily short term
9Benefits A focus on content not process An attempt to be relevant The right approach for a large, fast moving and often informal campaignA neutral, external, target focused viewGetting the balance right between breadth and focusQuick turnaroundNew newsAn attempt to be relevantBiased towards action, lesson learning and next stepsA clear view of our audience (not public or govt)Providing a framework for some of the strategic questions faced by the coalitionWhat was going to happen after MPHCampaigning challengesEffectiveness of activism…but not saying anything people didn’t know…did we change anything?
10Outputs of the evaluation Public mobilisationMass awareness and mass participationParliamentary mobilisationPolicy changeAchievements on aid and debt. Little on trade.Ways of workingHighly decentralised and consensualGood at: Promoting coalition unity, mobilising supporters, harnessing the energy of supportersNot so good at: Resolving tension, taking strategic decisions. Heavy demands on peopleFour areas of challengeLeadership modelCo-ordinating responsesPublic momentumBritish campaign“Most lessons to take from the year are definitely positive. The question is how to maintain this now you’re in a different era”
11Final thoughts Content not process Scope Feeding back Next steps Evaluation was not built into the campaign from the startThis may have been impossible & not advantageousScopeThere’s never enough time or moneyTime spent working on scope was vitalFeeding backThe campaign was ‘received’ rather than signed offThe coalition then disbandedWho took responsibility for what happened next?Next stepsWere we right to put these in?At least it wasn’t left on the shelfQuis custodiet ipsos custodes?Who evaluates the evaluation?
12Judge for yourself BOND website Campaign EvaluationMedia EvaluationNew Media EvaluationVerdict statementsPolicy demands