Cs6 p17 williams evidence-based prog planning for rural econ dev
1. EVIDENCE-BASED
PROGRAM PLANNING FOR
RURAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
Toby Williams, Senior Project Manager, Community
Futures Alberta
Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation Rural
Research Workshop “From Policy to Research and Back
Again” May 5, 2011 Ottawa, Ontario
2. Rural economic development
funding programs in Alberta
$200 million since 2005
Rural Alberta’s Development Fund - $100 million
Community Adjustment Fund - $100 million
Rural Community Adaptation Program - $15 million
RCED - Rural Community Economic Development program - $2.1
million
RDI - Rural Diversification Initiative -$3.2 million
3. What is Community Futures
(CF)?
Rural economic development organizations
Services and loans to businesses
4. Comparing Eligibility Requirements
for RCED and RDI
RCED (2005-2008) RDI (2008 – 2012)
69 projects funded 19 projects funded
Smaller projects Larger projects: min.
size $100,000
20% matching funds
required 40% matching funds
required (10% from
Broad economic private sector)
development Focused on rural
(including planning diversification
studies)
5. Examples of Projects
Grande Prairie Region Computer Gaming
Central Alberta Regional Innovation Network
South East Alberta Technology Strategy
Motorcycle Tourism Cluster in the Peace
Country
Local Food Expansion in the Capital Region
6. Comparing RCED and RDI:
Selected Results
RCED RDI
Projects funded 69 19
Average size of projects $60,385 $338,507
Average contribution per project $30,256 (50%) $168,735 (50%)
% CF participation (as a project lead 89% (25/28 CFs) 57% (16/28 CFs)
or partner)
Collaboration and partnership Avg. 8 partners Avg. 9.6 partners
% projects that completed activities 70% met or N/A yet
and met timelines exceeded
objectives
Sustainability (longer term viability) 93% still alive after N/A yet
2 years
7. Research Questions
What makes a rural economic development
project successful and how do you measure
success?
What factors affect the ability of CF
organizations (and by extension, other rural
orgs) to start and successfully complete
projects?
8. Research Methods
Case study design – 2 cases (RCED and RDI)
Analysis of internal documents
Surveys
Interviews
9. 1st Research Question: What makes an
economic development project successful?
Program administrators
Rural respondents said: actually measured:
Partners Project goal
Collaboration achievement
Impact on business
Capacity building
Partners
Impact on business
Collaboration
Sustainability Capacity building
Sustainability
10. Conclusions: Measuring
Success
In addition to goal achievement and
economic impacts, funders and program
administrators should measure and value
long-term community outcomes like:
ability and inclination to collaborate
increase in skills and knowledge and
ability to sustain a project over the longer
term
11. 2nd Research Question: What
factors affect success?
90% of CFs started at least 1 project and about
70% of RCED projects met or exceeded their
objectives.
We suspected 3 factors that influenced ability to
start and successfully complete a project:
Participation in capacity building
Size of communities
Human resources
12. Capacity Building
Capacity building included coaching,
information and training
Not all CFs participated equally in capacity
building
Hypothesis: participation in capacity building
activities will increase likelihood of starting
and successfully completing a project
because participants have better skills and
knowledge
13. Capacity Building: Statistical
Results
A strong, positive correlation between
capacity building and ability to start a
project (p 0.581 sig 0.001)
A moderately positive correlation (p
0.384 sig 0.043) between participation in
capacity building and the percentage of
projects that were successfully
completed
15. Capacity Building Matters
To the extent that program administrators want
to maximize access and success in economic
development funding programs, they should
ensure access to training, information and
coaching
16. Size of Communities
The number of larger
communities (i.e. +
2,000 people) varies
by CF region
Hypothesis: CFs in a
region with a greater
number of larger
communities will be
more likely to start and
successfully complete
a project because they
have more ideas, help,
partners, and
resources.
17. Size of Communities: Statistical
Results
A strong, positive correlation between #
of larger communities in a CF region and
ability to start a project (p 0.493 sig
0.008)
A moderately positive correlation
between # of larger communities and the
ability to successfully complete a project
(p 0.404 sig 0.033)
19. Size of Communities Matters
Very rural communities/regions will have more
difficulty accessing economic development
funding programs and will be less likely to
successfully complete a project
20. Human Resources
Not all CF offices have a dedicated CED
Coordinator
Hypothesis: CFs who have a dedicated CED
Coordinator will be more likely to start and to
successfully complete a project because they
have a person to pull together partners and
resources to start a project and make sure the
project gets done
23. Human Resources Matter
Rural regions with a project coordinator (e.g.
CED Coordinator) will be more likely to start
and successfully complete economic
development projects than regions without
one.
24. Conclusions: Factors that impact
success
To the extent that funders and program
administrators want to maximize access and
success:
Ensure opportunities for capacity building
Ensure access to a project coordinator
For very rural regions, ensure additional
support and ensure program guidelines
aren’t prohibitive
25. Conclusions: continued
These conclusions may seem self-evident but …
RCED and RDI were the only programs in
Alberta to provide capacity building
Some programs say they are targeted at small
communities but their eligibility guidelines are
almost impossible to achieve for small
communities
Many programs are evaluated based only on
short-term economic impacts (or not evaluated
at all)
26. Designing Future Economic
Development Funding Programs
This research provides statistical weight and
rationale for:
Including a capacity building component in
programs
Not inadvertently excluding very rural
communities
Ensuring access to a project coordinator
Including longer-term measures of success in
program planning and evaluation such as
inclination to collaborate, increase in skills and
knowledge, and ability to sustain a project.
27. Thank You!
Questions?
Contact Toby Williams at
toby@cfna.ca or call 403-851-
9995 ext 224.
