Arts Council England – Mandatory Requirements for National Portfolio Organisations Using the Impact & Insight Toolkit; Financial year 2021-22

The information on this page was written by Arts Council England for NPOs using the Impact & Insight Toolkit. View/download a PDF version of this page here.

 

It is a mandatory requirement for band 2 and 3 National Portfolio Organisations (NPOs) to undertake a minimum amount of evaluation activity each year using the Impact Insight Toolkit (the Toolkit). 

This document provides a full description of what is required of band 2 and 3 NPOs with respect to the Toolkitand guidance as to what the expectations are for band 1 NPOs.

 

Mandatory evaluation expectations for band 2 and 3 NPOs 

For the year 2021-22, the mandatory evaluation expectations have been developed to provide more flexibility for NPOs using the Toolkit. 

band 2 or 3 NPO must complete four evaluations, where: 

  • At least two adhere to the Core evaluation type 
  • The remaining two adhere to either the Core or the Flexible evaluation type 

The Flexible evaluation type is new and allows the NPO to choose their own dimensions for that evaluation. A comprehensive description of what both the Core and Flexible evaluation types must include is given below.

Within a month of completing each of the four evaluations, the NPO must then: 

  1. Create an Insights Report and submit the data to Arts Council England (ACE) – this process occurs entirely within the Culture Counts platform.
  2. Share the Insights Report with their Relationship Manager via email  this requires the NPO to save the created Insights Report and send it to their Relationship Manager manually via email. 

Band 2 and 3 NPOs must also create a second report type – the Annual Summary Report.  This is an annual, combined report of the NPO’s four submitted evaluations. It shows comparisons between the different evaluated works and provides opportunities for reflection. 

In preparation for June’s Grantium submission, the NPO must: 

  1. Create an Annual Summary Report – this occurs within the Culture Counts platform. 
  2. Submit the Annual Summary Report to ACE – this process occurs via Grantium as part of an NPO’s June submission. 

NPOs are encouraged to include additional questions within their surveys, and there are suggestions made within the platform to make this simpler for specific types of work (e.g. Online Works or Participatory). However, this is not mandatory. 

 Beyond the minimum requirement of four mandatory evaluations, all NPOs are welcome to undertake as many additional evaluations as they like.  There is no requirement to share these evaluations with ACE and they can be designed in any way that NPOs choose.

Evaluation Type Definitions 

There are two types of evaluation which may contribute to band 2 and 3 NPO mandatory requirements, these are Core and Flexible. 

For both evaluation types, survey data resulting from specific questions must be collected from four respondent groups. These requirements are shown in the tables below. 

Core Evaluation Type 

Respondent Group Self Prior Self Post Peer Post Public 
Required Questions *ACE Core Dimensions – self and peer reviewers *ACE Core Dimensions – self and peer reviewers *ACE Core Dimensions – self and peer reviewers 

*ACE Core Dimensions – public respondents 

 

***Standard demographics 

Required Responses At least 1 survey response At least 1 survey response At least 1 survey response At least 1 survey response 

 

Flexible Evaluation Type 

Respondent Group Self Prior Self Post Peer Post Public 
Required Questions 

At least 4 dimensions from the **Cultural Experience or ACE Participatory categories 

 

At least 4 dimensions from the **Cultural Experience or ACE Participatory categories At least 4 dimensions from the **Cultural Experience or ACE Participatory categories 

At least 4 dimensions from the **Cultural Experience or ACE Participatory categories 

 

Required Responses At least 1 survey response At least 1 survey response At least 1 survey response At least 1 survey response 

 

*The contents of question categories are given in the appendix 

**At least 4 flexible dimensions must be the same across all respondent groups 

*** Standard demographic questions are shown in the appendix 

 

Event/activity choice  

We encourage NPOs to evaluate a range of their work (e.g. theatre productions in a main house and studio).  NPOs can use the Impact & Insight Toolkit to evaluate any public facing work, including participatory work and work that is delivered online or outdoors.  NPOs will find the Toolkit most valuable if they use it to evaluate work where they can learn something interesting about the experiences of their audiences, or where they have a particular hypothesis about programming or marketing that they wish to test.  NPOs can discuss their event choices with their Relationship Manager if that would be helpful.   

 

Special Circumstances 

Where an organisation is primarily participatory, the NPO should discuss with their Relationship Manager whether more than two of their evaluations can be built around the Participatory dimensions instead. 

Touring and receiving NPOs can use the Culture Counts platform to carry out a shared evaluation of the same event.  Each organisation will need to submit a separate report on the event to their Relationship Manager; this will count towards the quota of mandatory evaluations for both organisations. 

Band 2 and 3 NPOs that do not have four events per year to evaluate, such as biennials or those with a limited public programme, should discuss suitable usage with their Relationship Manager.  

Sampling Guidance  

Counting What Counts has produced guidance specifically on appropriate sample sizes for different types of event, including participatory events which typically involve smaller groups of people.  The minimum number of public responses required in order to meet the mandatory requirements is one; however, it is advised that NPOs follow the guidance available to ensure maximum insight is gained. 

 

Peer Review 

 In addition to including at least one peer review in each evaluation, it is a mandatory requirement for all band 2 or 3 NPOs to register at least one peer reviewer from their organisation to the Peer Matching Resource, available via the Toolkit.  This peer reviewer may be invited by other NPOs to provide a review.  It is expected that each NPO will provide four peer reviews over the course of each evaluation year.  In some instances, this may not be possible.  If the NPO is uncertain whether they will be able to provide four peer reviews per year, they should discuss this with their Relationship Manager.   

 

Evaluation expectations for band 1 NPOs 

There is no requirement for band 1 NPOs to use the Impact & Insight Toolkit but, if they do choose to use it, we expect them to follow the standards set out here for at least one Core evaluation each year.  Findings from this evaluation should then be shared with their Relationship Manager, using the agreed reporting template.

 

Appendix 

Survey Type Definitions 

Public 

An Impact & Insight survey completed by a representative sample of the audience 

 

Self Prior 

An Impact & Insight survey from a relevant member of staff outlining the creative intentions for the work (ideally NPOs should engage at least three members of staff for each evaluation) 

 

Self Post 

An Impact & Insight survey completed by the same staff members that completed the Prior survey 

 

Peer Post An Impact & Insight survey completed by relevant peers (ideally NPOs should engage at least three peers for each evaluation) 

 

Please know that it is possible to conduct the Self Post and Peer Post surveys within one survey, as demonstrated in the original Mandatory Evaluation Template.

 

Question Categories 

Dimension Category Dimension Statement 
ACE Core Dimensions – self and peer reviewers Captivation It was absorbing and held my attention 
Challenge It was thought provoking 
Concept It was an interesting idea/programme 
Distinctiveness It was different from things I’ve experienced before 
Relevance It had something to say about the world in which we live 
Rigour It was well thought through and put together 
Excellence It was one of the best examples of its type that I have seen 
Originality It was ground-breaking 
Risk The artists/curators really challenged themselves with this work 
ACE Core Dimensions – public respondents Captivation It was absorbing and held my attention 
Challenge It was thought provoking 
Concept It was an interesting idea/programme 
Distinctiveness It was different from things I’ve experienced before 
Relevance It had something to say about the world in which we live 
Rigour It was well thought through and put together 
ACE Participatory Skills I gained new skills 
Enjoyment I had a good time 
Experimenting I felt comfortable trying new things 
Authenticity It felt like a real artistic experience 
Motivation I feel motivated to do more creative things in the future 
Contribution I felt like my contribution mattered 
Confidence I feel more confident about doing new things 
Support People in the group supported each other 
Artistic Skills I improved my artistic skills 
Acceptance I felt like I could be myself 
Voice My ideas were taken seriously 
Responsiveness The organisers responded well to the needs of the group 
Organisation The project was well organised 
Stretch I did something I didn’t know I was capable of 
Feedback I got helpful feedback 
Empathy It helped me understand other people’s points of view 
Friendship I felt close to other people involved in the project 
New People I got to know people who are different to me 
Belonging They made me feel part of the team 
Creativity I feel more able to express myself creatively 
Identity It helped me to see myself differently 
Cultural Experience Captivation It was absorbing and held my attention 
Challenge It was thought provoking 
Concept It was an interesting idea/programme 
Distinctiveness It was different from things I’ve experienced before 
Relevance It had something to say about the world in which we live 
Rigour It was well thought through and put together 
Excellence It was one of the best examples of its type that I have seen 
Originality It was ground-breaking 
Risk The artists/curators really challenged themselves with this work 
Enthusiasm I would come to something like this again 
Presentation It was well  produced and presented 
Local Impact It’s important that it’s happening here 
Cultural Contribution It provides an important addition to the cultural like of the area 
Imagination It opened my mind to new possibilities 
Innovation It was introduced to the audience in a new way 
Inquisitiveness It made me want to find out more about the artwork 
Authenticity It had a connection to the State/Country we live in 

 

Standard demographics question set: 

Age: What is your age? 

Gender: How would you describe your gender? 

Postcode: What is your postcode? 

 

Go back to Support Materials

 

The information on this page was last updated on 26 March, 2021.

X
X