1. Monitoring and Evaluation Heritage Tourism Project Key Issues as envisaged by Cadw Howard James

2. Key requirements Visitor numbers each year Two visitor surveys to determine type and therefore value of visitor Any other key outputs/ outcomes relating to a particular project

3. Why M&E ? General good practice Must be able to demonstrate to WEFO that proposed outputs and outcomes are being delivered

4. Why common E4G approach? Significant cost savings eg reduced sample sizes Provide more substantial evidence base Increased guidance and support

5. Visitor numbers Must know how many extra visitors result from any project Can be collected in variety of ways Staffed /paying sites/events Electronic counters –used widely by Cadw Head counts on specified days

6. Visitor surveys –sample numbers Most of “jobs” created by project will be indirect Can only calculate wider economic impact through survey Survey numbers significantly reduced overall through joint E4G approach

7. Visitor surveys -2011 Some projects will not be completed in 2011 Will visitors be used in survey for those projects which are open, but not completed?

8. E4G visitor surveys - links very similar to Cadw visitor surveys May well be similar to surveys carried out by delivery partners –if so can incorporate within other survey Can survey more than minimum requested but weighting reduced for overall E4G sample

9. M&E –after end of funding period M&E will need to continue until [2025?] at least Visitor numbers and other key outputs /outcomes need to be collected Particularly important for projects finishing close to end of funding period Getting it right in initial visitor surveys reduces risks of needing further survey