BIDS CPD Workshop Nov 2011

BIDs SCOTLAND CPD WORKSHOPS

• Institute of Place Management (IPM): “international body that supports those who are committed to developing, managing and making places better.”

• Benefits of IPM CPD include: • Demonstrates a commitment to the place management

industry.• Provides national and international recognition of individuals’

learning.• Receive an IPM CPD Certificate & self-assessment record that

allows you to “bank points” with IPM if you’re a member. Sign up @ http://www.placemanagement.org/

http://www.placemanagement.org/



BIDS: Statistics and Optimising Growth

BIDS CPD Workshop

Wednesday 23rd November 2011

Steve Halsall, Partner

Simon Power, Managing Consultant

www.caci.co.uk

http://www.caci.co.uk/

Agenda

Introduction

Data sources

Consumer research

Analytical methods Benchmarking Modelling Visualisation

Conclusions

4

Owned by CACI Inc ($3.6bn)

Over 30 years providing targeted marketing solutions based on customer and market analysis

The first and largest market analysis business in UK

Turnover FY11 £74m

Growing & acquiring companies

Who are CACI?

6

DataData interrogators not data collectorsHuge depth and breadth of dataData integrity and quality of paramount importance

SoftwareUnique market analysis tools: InSite, Impact ModelerDesigned specifically for market analysis and scenario planningUsed internally by CACI consultants

ConsultancyEurope’s largest independent location planning teamAutomotive, Retail, Finance and Public Sector & Commercial Property

CACI: 3 Key Strengths

Location Planning Clients

http://www.cbldf.org/graphics/logos/starbuckslogo.gif

http://www.sony.co.uk/default.asp

http://www.paperchase.co.uk/index.php?f=home.htm

http://www.pl-radio.dk/Orange-logo.jpeg

9Copyright 2011 CACI Limited

The Role of CACI Strategy & Analytics

10

Statistics to Optimise Growth

BIDS: Role of Statistics in Optimising Growth

Strategic planning Vision for the BID (and role in local hierarchy) Business mix Target occupiers

Performance Monitoring Position relative to strategic plan Customer perceptions Vacant properties

Tactical marketing Consumers Occupiers

Provide an evidence base for on-going funding

11

12

Data Sources

Retail Footprint 2011

Retail Footprint is a gravity model that replicates the pattern of shopper behaviour to identify how centres perform.

It is a gravity model that defines catchments for shopping centres selling Comparison Goods in Great Britain.

The gravity model approach replicates the decision-making process consumers use when they shop.

Retail Footprint calculates comparison expenditure and shopper populations for each centre based on the principles that:

People are more likely to visit larger, more attractive centres.People are more likely to visit centres that are easily accessible to them (based on a combination of distance and drive-time).

Using the location of survey respondents the performance of a centre can be analysed by comparing the distribution of actual customers with that predicted by the gravity model.

This is a valuable tool in identifying areas to target for marketing in the future.

Gravity Methodology

14

Residential Zone 1

Residential Zone 2

£100

£50060% - £300

10% - £10£310

90% - £90Retail Centre A

Score: 50Score: 25

Retail Centre B

Score: 100

£29040% - £200

1. Centre attractiveness

2. Centre type

3. Demand

4. Competing centres

5. Distance to Centre

Stirling: Current Status

Stirling is currently classed as an ‘Average Centre’ in Retail Footprint 2011, which forms part of the ‘Major Centres’ category. It currently has a Retail Footprint (RF) score of 847.

Major Centres are large ‘traditional’ High Street centres located in the middle of either large towns or ‘secondary’ regional cities.

These are the second tier in the regional shopping hierarchy, in terms of both the number of Comparison Goods outlets and shopper numbers.

Major Centres have an average Retail Footprint attractiveness score of 789 and a catchment market share of 9.6%. 106 retail centres are classified as Major Centres and average comparison goods expenditure is £256 million.

‘Average Centres’ are typically mass-market in profile, displaying some element of all three retail offer types. These centres display neither a premium nor value retail provision bias, though there is usually more of the latter present.

Average retail centres include such locations as Stirling, Doncaster and Hemel Hempstead.

Stirling: 2011 Catchment

Source: CACI Retail Footprint and InSite

* Total = Primary, Secondary, Tertiary & Quaternary* Core = Primary & Secondary

Total Residential Expenditure: £1,470.4mMarket Potential: £225.0mMarket Share (Total*): 15.3%Market Share (Core*): 65.0%

Stirling: 2011 Market Shares

Source: CACI Retail Footprint and InSite

Source: CACI Retail Footprint

Stirling: Current Catchment SummaryCurrent market potential of £225 million per annum

Catchment TotalPopulation

Total Comparison Goods Expenditure

(£m)

Shopper Population

Comparison Goods Market Potential

(£m)

Market Share (%)

Primary 57,075 £151.1 43,213 £114.3 75.6%

Secondary 41,708 £109.3 20,849 £55.0 50.4%

Core Catchment 98,783 £260.4 64,061 £169.3 65.0%

Tertiary 73,855 £184.8 13,733 £33.9 18.3%

Quaternary 394,201 £1,025.2 8,306 £21.8 2.1%

Total Catchment 566,839 £1,470.4 86,100 £225.0 15.3%


Stirling: Category ExpenditureTotal market potential of £450.1 million per annum

CategoryExpenditure per

Annum (£m)

Annual Household Spend (£)

Household Spend Index v

UK Scotland

Clothing & Footwear £66.3 £1,753.5 106 104House & Home £8.7 £230.7 97 106Leisure Goods £45.3 £1,197.8 109 104Personal Goods £12.7 £335.6 108 106Personal Care £24.6 £650.0 94 104Durable Goods £67.4 £1,781.6 103 106Comparison Goods £225.0 £5,949.1 104 105Convenience £173.5 £4,587.4 101 103Catering £51.7 £1,365.8 101 105Total Retail Spend £450.1 £11,902.3 103 104


Stirling: Retail Category Mix

Retail CategoryCount of Retailers

% of Retailers

% of Retailers - Index vs Scotland

% of Retail Footprint

Score

% of RF Score - Index vs Scotland

Clothing & Footwear 83 25.1% 153 44.3% 146

House & Home 4 1.2% 63 2.7% 104

Leisure Goods 38 11.5% 159 23.0% 148

Personal Goods 34 10.3% 136 12.7% 147

Personal Care 51 15.4% 97 8.0% 64

Durable Goods 19 5.7% 59 4.3% 26

Convenience 29 8.8% 61 4.2% 36

Catering 73 22.1% 82 0.7% 43

Grand Total 331 100.0% 100 100.0% 100


Stirling: Leakage to Competing Centres

Retail Footprint Centre Retail Footprint ClassRF

ScoreDistance (Miles)

Market Share (Core)

Market Share (Total)

Glasgow National Centres 3,374 21.6 7.9% 19.2%Falkirk Average Centres 753 10.0 2.9% 15.5%Stirling Average Centres 847 0.0 65.0% 15.3%Falkirk - Central RP Major Shopping Parks 239 9.9 1.6% 6.0%Edinburgh Principal Centres 2,495 30.8 0.3% 4.8%Dunfermline Average Regional Towns 497 18.7 0.1% 4.0%Cumbernauld Value Metropolitan Towns 393 12.0 0.3% 3.5%Stirling - Springkerse RP Large Retail Parks with Fashion 210 1.0 12.1% 3.1%Livingston Designer Outlet Major FOCs Mass Market 220 23.0 0.0% 2.3%Tillicoultry - Sterling Mills Medium Sized FOCs 66 7.8 3.0% 2.1%Livingston Mall- Dominated Town Centres 507 23.0 No Core 2.0%Alloa Average Local Centres 181 5.6 3.7% 1.7%Glasgow - The Fort SP Super Parks 339 18.7 0.3% 1.5%Edinburgh - Gyle Centre Average Purpose Built District Centres 358 27.1 No Core 1.3%Airdrie Average Metropolitan Towns 201 17.5 No Core 1.0%Perth Quality Regional Towns 780 27.4 0.1% 1.0%Bathgate Average Local Centres 107 18.8 No Core 1.0%Silverburn Urban Regional Malls 581 25.8 0.2% 0.9%Crieff Rural Centres 53 18.0 No Core 0.9%Glasgow - Braehead SC Urban Regional Malls 671 23.6 0.3% 0.8%Coatbridge - Faraday RP Large Retail Parks with Fashion 177 18.3 No Core 0.6%Dunfermline - Halbeath RP Retail Parks Minority Fashion 92 20.5 No Core 0.5%Perth - St Catherines RP Large Retail Parks with Fashion 206 27.2 0.1% 0.5%Linlithgow - Stockbridge RP Retail Parks Minority Fashion 44 15.6 No Core 0.5%Callander Very Small Urban Centres 29 13.9 0.1% 0.5%


Market Position

Premium Mass Value

Stirling 7.9 66.7 25.4

Glasgow 30.6 52.5 16.9

Falkirk 2.8 66.4 30.8

Falkirk- Central RP 0.0 66.9 33.1

Edinburgh 40.8 50.0 9.2

Dunfermline 3.7 60.7 35.6

Competing Centres Average

15.6 59.3 25.1

Stirling Index 50.6 112.5 101.1


Stirling: UK RF RankingStirling currently ranked 138th in the UK

Rank Centre Name RF Minor ClassRF

Score

Comparison Goods Market Potential (£m)

129 Warrington Average Centres 841 £241.8

130 Batley - Birstall Shopping Park Major Shopping Parks 509 £240.6

131 Chesterfield Lower Average Centres 805 £237.4

132 Cheshire Oaks - McArthurGlen Outlet CentreMajor FOCs Premium Brands 300 £232.9

133 Falkirk Average Centres 753 £232.0

134 Cheapside Quality London Non- Residential Centres 613 £229.2

135 King's Lynn Lower Average Centres 825 £228.4

136 Truro Quality Regional Towns 857 £228.2

137 Enfield Average Conurbation Towns 638 £225.2

138 Stirling Average Centres 847 £225.0

139 Stockton- on- Tees - Teesside Shopping ParkSuper Parks 424 £224.3

140 Uxbridge Average Conurbation Towns 921 £223.0

141 Inverness Average Centres 820 £221.8

142 Cambridge - Grafton Centre Average Purpose Built District Centres 490 £221.7

143 Street - Clarks Village Outlet Centre Major FOCs Premium Brands 141 £221.5

144 Ashton- under- Lyne Average Conurbation Towns 729 £220.6

145 Hastings Average Centres 574 £220.5

146 Freeport Braintree Outlet Centre Major FOCs Premium Brands 155 £219.4

147 Banbury Average Centres 815 £219.3

148 St Helens Average Centres 780 £218.7


Stirling: Scotland RF RankingStirling currently ranked 8th in Scotland

Rank Centre Name RF Minor ClassRF

Score

Comparison Goods Market Potential (£m)

1 Glasgow National Centres 3,374 £2,471.0

2 Edinburgh Principal Centres 2,495 £1,088.8

3 Aberdeen Principal Centres 1,750 £804.7

4 Dundee Average Regional Centres 1,129 £415.1

5 Glasgow - Braehead Shopping Centre Urban Regional Malls 671 £363.3

6 Silverburn Urban Regional Malls 581 £357.8

7 Falkirk Average Centres 753 £232.0

8 Stirling Average Centres 847 £225.0

9 Inverness Average Centres 820 £221.8

10 Edinburgh - Fort Kinnaird Retail Park Super Parks 507 £184.6

11 Perth Quality Regional Towns 780 £176.7

12 East Kilbride Mall- Dominated Town Centres 730 £173.2

13 Livingston Mall- Dominated Town Centres 507 £148.8

14 Ayr Average Regional Towns 786 £147.6

15 Dunfermline Average Regional Towns 497 £145.0

16 Loanhead - Pentland Retail Park Major Shopping Parks 423 £137.5

17 Kirkcaldy Average Regional Towns 556 £135.4

18 Livingston Designer Outlet Major FOCs Mass Market 220 £131.3

19 Edinburgh - Gyle Centre Average Purpose Built District Centres 358 £129.1

20 Glasgow - The Fort Shopping Park Super Parks 339 £120.6

ACORN combines geography with demographics and lifestyle information, grouping the entire population into 5 categories, 17 groups and 56 types.

By analysing significant social factors and consumer behaviour, it provides precise information and an in-depth understanding of the different types of consumers in every part of the country.

ACORN can be used proactively as part of a shopper-focused tenant mix strategy, to facilitate ongoing asset management, for effective catchment zoning and ‘battleground’ analysis, and to drive marketing and shopper communication strategy.

ACORN consumer classification

Stirling: Current Catchment ACORN Profile

Source: ACORN and Retail Footprint

Wealthy Achievers

Urban Prosperity

Comfortably Off

Moderate Means

Hard-Pressed

We

alt

hy

Ex

ecu

tiv

es

Affl

ue

nt

Gre

ys

Flo

uri

shin

g F

am

ilie

s

Pro

spe

rou

s P

rofe

ssio

na

ls

Ed

uca

ted

Urb

an

ite

s

Asp

irin

g S

ing

les

Sta

rtin

g O

ut

Se

cure

Fa

mili

es

Se

ttle

d S

ub

urb

ia

Pru

de

nt

Pe

nsi

on

ers

Asi

an

Co

mm

un

itie

s

Po

st In

du

stri

al F

am

ilie

s

Blu

e-c

olla

r R

oo

ts

Str

ug

glin

g F

am

ilie

s

Bu

rde

ne

d S

ing

les

Hig

h R

ise

Ha

rdsh

ip

Inn

er

Cit

y A

dv

ers

ity

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Stirling UK Average Scotland Average

Av

era

ge

Re

tail

Sp

en

d (

£)

Group A: Wealthy Executives

Some of the most affluent people in the UK

Large, 4+ bedroom detached houses, many owned outright

Up-market brand preferences, high spends on home & recreation

Consumers with the money and space to enjoy very comfortable lifestyles

Distribution Map Key Retail Brands Demographic Data

8.1% 9.0%

Key Features

Top Retail Centres (%) Guildford Tunbridge Wells High Wycombe Bicester Village Reading

£49,400

Category

A: Wealthy Achievers

B: Affluent Greys

C: Flourishing Families

Wealthy Achievers

Urban Prosperity

Comfortably Off

Moderate Means

Hard-Pressed

Retail ACORN

http://www.whittard.co.uk/


Group N: Struggling Families

Low income families living on traditional low-rise estates

Some have bought council houses; most continue to rent

Money is tight; shopping focuses on cheaper stores & catalogues

Visiting the pub, betting and bingo are common activities

These families are disadvantaged due to educational underachievement and consequent lack of opportunity

Distribution Map Key Retail Brands Demographic Data

12.0% 12.8%

Key Features

Top Retail Centres (%) Sunderland Wolverhampton Doncaster Dudley - Merry Hill Meadowhall

£25,100

Category

N: Struggling Families

O: Burdened Singles

P: High-Rise Hardship

Q: Inner City Adversity

Wealthy Achievers

Urban Prosperity

Comfortably Off

Moderate Means

Hard-Pressed

Retail ACORN

http://www.george.jobs/index.aspx


29

Consumer Research


Traditional Consumer Research Method

Time needed for collation/checking

Loss/damage of completed surveys

Hit rates compromised

Non adaptive


Tablets provide a flexible platform for collection


Collaboration with

/ 3G

Data Collection

Secure Server

Instant Statistics

Further Analysis and Reporting


Key Benefits

Attractive and professional

Real time data monitoring

Hot swap questions

New question types

Instant statistics

Interactive collection (age and income)

Centre Audit

34

Department Stores 20,544 26.0% 17.1%Variety Stores 7,020 8.9% 5.8%Clothing & Accessories 34,458 43.6% 28.6%Leisure Goods 7,186 9.1% 6.0%Household Goods 3,047 3.9% 2.5%Health & Beauty 3,704 4.7% 3.1%Electrical Goods 3,098 3.9% 2.6%Retail Centre Goods Sub-Total 79,056 100.0% 65.7%Catering 9,495 7.9%Markets 6,222 5.2%Supermarkets 3,144 2.6%Convenience 588 0.5%Other Sales of Goods* 1,034 0.9%Banks and Building Societies 2,075 1.7%Other Services* * 4,030 3.3%Amusements/Betting Shops 1,263 1.0%Non RCG Sub-Total 27,851 23.1%Non-Vacant Sub-Total 106,907 88.8%Vacant 13,501 11.2%Grand Total 120,408

% of TotalRetail / Service Provider Category

Net Sq. M % of RCG

Customer Profiling

Wealthy Executives

Affluent Greys

Flourishing Families

Prosperous Professionals

Educated UrbanitesAspiring Singles

Starting Out

Secure Families

Settled Suburbia

Prudent Pensioners

Asian Communities

Post I ndustrial Families

Blue-collar Roots

Struggling Families

Burdened Singles

High Rise Hardship

I nner City Adversity

0

50

100

150

200

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

Survey Profile

Cat

chm

ent

Profi

le

Identifying target visitorsOpportunity groups include Educated Urbanites, Aspiring Singles and Secure Families

Source: ACORN, Survey Data & CACI Analysis

Niche Groups

Low High

Low

HighCore Groups

Opportunity GroupsNon Core Groups

Survey Analysis: Average spend by ACORN Group

($)

38

Analytical Methods - Benchmarking

www.caci.co.uk

© CACI Ltd, 2010CCI | Commercial in Confidence

Scotland Benchmarking: Market Size & ACORN Profile

CACI have benchmarked Falkirk using the 310,000ft² extension development scenario against existing Retail Footprint centres. Market potential (size/scale) and ACORN Group profile (similar demographics and lifestyle) are used to identify analogues. The benchmarks can be used in order to identify opportunities for Falkirk’s retail offer.

A correlation coefficient of 0.75 or above is considered to be a strong fit in terms of similarity of ACORN profile (1.00 would be a perfect fit). The selected centres have a market size within +/- ~25% of Falkirk’s market size.

Source: Retail Footprint 10 & ACORN

£0.0

£50.0

£100.0

£150.0

£200.0

£250.0

£300.0

£350.0

£400.0

Falkirk Stirling East Kilbride Ayr Edinburgh -Fort KinnairdRetail Park

Glasgow -BraeheadShoppingCentre

Annual C

om

pari

son E

xpenditure

(£m

)

0.60

0.65

0.70

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

AC

OR

N C

orr

ela

tion

Comparison Expenditure (£Millions) ACORN Correlation

www.caci.co.uk


Source: Retail Footprint ‘10

Scotland Benchmarking: Market Positioning

Falkirk currently has 30% of its retail provision orientated towards value retail, with a further 68% of mass retail.

The out of town schemes in Braehead and Fort Kinnaird have a slightly different market position compared to Falkirk, with an increased emphasis on mass and premium retail.

Falkirk has higher representation of value retail to the detriment of premium when compared to the benchmark average.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Benchmark Average

Stirling

East Kilbride

Ayr

Edinburgh - Fort KinnairdRetail Park

Glasgow - BraeheadShopping Centre

Falkirk

Value Mass Premium

www.caci.co.uk

© CACI Ltd, 2010CCI | Commercial in Confidence41

Analytical Methods - Modelling

www.caci.co.uk


Modelling

Model the impact of changes to the retail provision

New schemeExtensionRe scoping (market position)Competing destinations

42

www.caci.co.uk


What-if Modelling: Headroom Analysis

44

Analytical Methods - Visualisation

Visualisation

46

Conclusions

Conclusions

Statistics Data on people and places Supplement by customer surveys

Analytical Methods Benchmarking Modelling Visualisation

Provide BIDs with: Strategic direction (function and mix) Monitoring (KPIs/Health Check) Targeted marketing (where and who)

47

Town Centres:Know Your Area

Fionna KellNovember 2011

Issues

Training Needs Analysis

Town Centre Healthchecks

Training Needs Analysis March 2010 81 responses / 31% response rate Training needs identified

66% - town healthchecks 57% - action plans / whole town

strategies etc 77% - sources of data 71% - participation

Town Centre Healthchecks Systematic collection of information on

vitality and viability of town centres allowing a comparative analysis between centres and over time

Vitality – how busy or lively a town is

Viability – capacity to attract ongoing investment

Why?

Understand current position Monitor over time Compare with competitors Measure impacts Prepare strategy / action plan Prioritise resources Inward investment

Key Categories

Town Attraction Urban Management Safe Accessible

Town Attraction - Commercial Market Profile Diversity of Uses

Total Retail Floorspace (gross) Total No. Retail Units

Retailer Representation No. of Multiple / Independent Units Number of Comparison / Convenience Units

Retail Rankings Promis (Retail Provision) Venuscore

Zone A Rental Retail Yields Retail Vacancy Office rents / yields

Town Attraction – Leisure and Tourism No. of Leisure Services Units Eating /dining venues (cafe/restaurant) Bingo / amusements /Cinema/leisure Pubs and clubs Total number of visitors Number of tourist days Total visitor revenue Total direct and indirect employment

supported

Urban Management

Bins in town centre Recycling points Average £ per capita on street

cleaning Public / Business perceptions Nos. of public conveniences LEAMS Rating

Safe

Recorded Crime Incidents % Change in Recorded Crime

Incidents Change in Crimes of Violence Public perception of safety

(Business / shopper)

Accessible

Total car parking spaces Total on / off street split Rail passenger numbers No. licensed taxis No. city car club cars No. town bike club bikes

Data Sources Constabulary

Total Recorded Crimes in the Town Centre

Local Authority Litter Bins Public Conveniences Recycling Facilities Cleansing / Maintenance Expenditure Car Parking Spaces Tourism Statistics

EGi Zone A Retail Rents Retail Yields

General Register Office for Scotland Population statistics

GOAD Comparator Cities / Towns Retail Floorspace /

Units Retailer Representation

Office of Rail Regulations Annual Rail Passenger Carryings

Promis Total Catchment Population Retail Rankings Retailer Demand Retail Yields Zone A Retail Rents Market Size

Scotrail Railway station facilities

Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics Demographic Profiling

Scottish Property Network Office Rents/Availability

VenueScore Retail Rankings

VisitScotland Visitor Attraction Statistics

Constraints

Consistency of data Cost of accessing data Scale of town / availability of data Comparability of data Interpretation

Lies, damn lies and statistics

KNOW YOUR AREATOWN CENTRE REGENERATION:AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

Douglas Wheeler

BIDS CPD WORKSHOPS23 November 2011

STRUCTURE•Context

•Town Centre Regeneration Research

•Integrated Response to Challenges

• People• Economy• Place• Marketing

•Theory of Change

•Conclusions: Way Forward

RECENT PROJECTS: MULTI SKILLED TEAMS

Projects•Northern Ireland: DSD•N England: RDAs Market Town Initiatives•Scotland: Town Centre Regeneration Research

Skills•Land use & urban design: place intervention

• spatial strategies• development frameworks• master plans

•Local economic development•Involvement & delivery

TCR: How does it work and what can it achieve?First Aim

• Clearer understanding of activities

• Scope & nature of outputs & longer term outcomes

• Identify factors mechanisms & processes

• TCR Fund Projects: longitudinal: case studies

Second Aim

• Develop & populate Theory of Change model/s

• Involve experts/practitioners: test models

• Overall help to shape policy

Definition: SPP: city town district: irrespective of size: mix

TCR Research: Key Findings• Complex concept: multi-dimensional issues• ‘Whole town’: rather than focus just on

physical • Town centre: scale distinctiveness: context• Partnership: vision: strategy: action plan• Partnership is not an outcome:

need effective coordinated delivery

• Small/medium business: limited data • Community ownership of assets• Improving TCR Project Planning• Improving Approaches: TC Health Checks• Applying Theories of Change

TOWN CENTRE: INTEGRATED RESPONSE :

•Visioning process

•What kind of town?

•Integrated diverse whole town strategy

•Priority in Community Planning

•Partnership: three sectors

•Involvement: community/business ‘buy in’ •Townscape: distinctive: design quality

•Town centre plc: competitive position

•Stimulate confidence: compelling economic case

Place-making Place-mending: Different Scales

Region Whole settlement Town centre Block Plot

AUDITAPPROACH: PROCESS

Participation: Involvement Genuine involvement: decision

making Independent businesses: interviews Market research: users & non users Not ‘usual suspects’: go to them! Workshops & design charrettes Social media: facebook/twitter/web

STRATEGY STRUCTURE & COMPONENTS

Town Vision

People Place Economy

Parking & Accessibility

Enterprise & Business

Development

Visitor Destination

Improvements ‘Magnets’

Environmental Improvements:

‘Glue’

Place Making: Sites & Buildings

Marketing & Branding

TCR Project Planning: Limitations

• Lack results chains: link activities to long-term outcomes

• Don’t show short & interim outcomes on route

• Activities & outcomes are poorly specified:who they are targeted at thresholds of change that are expected

anticipated timescales for delivery.

Project Planning Limitations: Example

• Terminology inconsistent

• Which activities lead to which outcomes?

• Who is targeted & who/what will change?

• Nature and extent of change?

• Order and timelines for changes

• Evidence for claims and underpinning assumptions

• Leading onto problems for evaluation?

Priorities Timings Survey power /sensitivity if thresholds unknown

Monitoring & Evaluation: Limitations Poor evidence base & evaluation culture

Lack of critical longitudinal studies/evidence

Evaluation not seen as a priority

Limitations in project planning/health checks make evaluation problematic

Limited project specific data collected:

implementation process: short & interim outcomes

Attribution (evidence that TCR activity has lead to anticipated changes) only possible if we can link outcome data to project data

Addressing LimitationsApplying Theories of Change

• Evaluation approach: uses the programme’s ‘plans & underlying theory’ to guide the selection of evaluation questions, design & methods

• Claims:

Enhances project planning; provides a ‘road map’ Supports development of evaluation framework Helps with attribution

• Uses tools & criteria to describe/specify programme & intended outcomes/timescales/thresholds:

Logic models: flow chart Plausible, do-able & testable plans Prioritise evaluation questions, indicators, methods & timescales

Consistent Terminology

Financial Inputs

Public and private sector

spend

Activity

Interventions delivered

Output

Intermediate

effects

Outcomes

Effect on BID businesses

Impact

GVA

Some Common Measures

Financial Inputs

SpendLeverage

Funding secured

Activity

ProjectsGrants

Output

Shopfronts ImprovedVisitors in

Outcomes

FootfallPerceptionVacancies

Visitor SpendCrime

Impact

Jobst/o

Why Use TOC?

• Build convincing (evidence based) performance story

• Communicate agreed vision & plans• Provide clarity: activities & linkages to

outcomes • Aid planning & improve implementation • Helps you know what & when resources are needed• Highlights assumptions & risks• Links with bigger picture• Enhance evaluation & attribution evidence • Part of wider performance management system• Value in the process: not product• Commissioners & funders to encourage use

CONCLUSIONS: WAY FORWARD

•Scottish Government: Regeneration Policy: TCRF

•Whole town/integrated strategies

•Focus on what's distinctive

•Proactive: business driven & wider involvement

•Build convincing performance story: evidence

•Theories of Change

KNOW YOUR AREATOWN CENTRE REGENERATION:AN INTEGRATED APPROACH

Douglas Wheeler

www.douglaswheelerassociates.com

90

Know the Law: Legal Issues for BIDs

91

Know the Law: Legal Issues for BIDs

Craig N McKerracherAssociate

Harper Macleod LLP

23 November 2011

92

Outline of Presentation/ Scottish legislation/ BID structures/ Key issues/ Director’s Duties/ Questions

93

Scottish legislation

/ The Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006/ The Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 (Business

Improvement Districts Levy) Order 2007/ The Business Improvement Districts (Scotland)

Regulations 2007 (as amended)/ The Business Improvement Districts (Ballot

Arrangements) (Scotland) Regulations 2007

94

BID Structures

/ No statutory requirements regarding organisational structure – options include:

/ Unincorporated organisation/ Company limited by guarantee/ Limited Liability Partnership / Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation

95

BID Structures

/ No statutory requirements regarding organisational structure – options include:

/ Unincorporated organisation/ Company limited by guarantee/ Limited Liability Partnership/ Trust/ Community Interest Company/ Industrial and Provident Society / Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation

96

Company limited by guarantee/ Limited liability – members undertake to pay

specified “guarantee” amount if company is wound up, generally £1.00

/ No issue of shares or payment of dividends/ Non-profit distributing – profits used to further

company’s aims / Model of choice in England and Scotland to date/ Strikes balance between commercial and social

objectives

97

Advantages of company structure/ Familiarity/ Flexibility/ Transparency/ Well regulated/ Ability to attract funding/ Ability to attract members/directors/stakeholders

Constitution

/ Objects must tie-in with BID proposal/ Voting rights – one member, one vote?/ Distribution of assets on wind-up/ Degree of tailoring of constitutional

documents will be required

Membership

/ Public/private sector/ Local Authority/ Local business community/ Other key stakeholders

Governance

/ Board of directors/ Composition and powers/ Mix of skills and experience / Public/private/community sectors – strategic or

operational responsibility?/ Delegation of powers/ Conflicts of interest/ Partnership working

LLPs

/ Similar to partnership/ Reduced personal responsibility for members/ Compliance levels similar to companies/ Requirement to file accounts at Companies

House/ Normally used as profit-making vehicle/ May not be appropriate

SCIO

/ New legal form for charities registered in Scotland

/ OSCR is regulator, not Companies House/ Degree of limited liability for trustees/ Dependent upon charitable status/ Ceases to exist if removed from charity register/ Cannot be restored to register/ Advice should be sought before establishing

SCIO

Key issues

/ Vehicle structure/ Members/ Composition and powers of Board/ Governance / Contractual and partnership arrangements –

memorandum of understanding/baseline service agreement

/ Important to bear in mind that no “one size fits all” structure – structure should complement overall proposals, not vice versa

Key issues

/ Charitable status/ Tax issues/ Ensure establishment of BIDs is combined with legal,

accountancy and taxation advice to ensure structure covers all bases

Directors’ duties

/ Historically, rules governing company directors came from a range of sources:

/ common law;

/ case law; and

/ statute – Companies Act 1985 and Companies Act 2006

Directors’ duties

/ Current position – Companies Act 2006 (the “Act”)

/ The Act sets out a new statutory statement of directors’ duties

/ The directors’ duties in the Act replace previous common law/statutory position

Directors’ duties

/ The Act sets out seven “general duties” of company directors:

/ duty to act within powers;

/ duty to promote the success of the company;

/ duty to exercise independent judgment;

/ duty to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence;

/ duty to avoid conflicts of interest;

/ duty not to accept benefits from third parties; and

/ duty to declare interest in proposed transaction or arrangement

Directors’ duties

/ Duty to act within powers comprises:

/ a duty to act in accordance with the company’s constitution (its memorandum and articles of association); and

/ a duty to only exercise powers of a company director for their power purpose

Directors’ duties

/ Duty to promote the success of the company/ A company director “must act in the way he

considers, in good faith, would be most likely to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole”

/ Duty is subject to duty to act in the best interests of creditors in circumstances of actual or threatened insolvency – in this regard, Act preserves common law position

Directors’ duties

/ Duty to promote the success of the company/ In deciding how to promote the success of the company, a director

must have regard “amongst other matters” to:

/ the likely long-term consequences of their decisions;

/ the interests of the company’s employees;

/ the need to foster the company’s business relationships with suppliers, customers and others;

/ the impact of the company’s operations on the community and the environment;

/ the desirability of maintaining a reputation for high standards of business conduct; and

/ the need to act fairly as between members of the company

Directors’ duties

/ Duty to promote the success of the company/ The list of factors to be considered by company directors in relation

to the above duty is not definitive but the new duty is not intended to impose additional burdens on company directors

/ Intended to reflect what is already regarded as best practice / Board should consider at least those factors – but not just a “box-

ticking” exercise/ Board minutes should refer to consideration of those factors

together with any additional factors deemed to be relevant – e.g. environmental impact

/ Most companies are unlikely to need to make significant changes to current decision-making procedures

Directors’ duties

/ Duty to exercise independent judgement

/ Concerns raised that this duty would prevent directors from relying upon advice/guidance from others in areas in which they may not be expert (e.g. legal, financial, technical matters)

/ Government has confirmed that directors will continue to be able to: (i) rely upon external advice/guidance; and (ii) delegate matters to committees/executive, provided they exercise their own judgement in deciding whether to follow particular advice/guidance or delegate matters

Directors’ duties

/ Duty to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence / The care, skill and diligence that would be exercised by a

reasonably diligent person with:

/ the general knowledge, skill and experience that may reasonably expected of a person carrying out functions carried out by the director in relation to the company; and

/ the general knowledge, skill and experience that the director actually has

/ Two tests – (i) is minimum objective standard and (ii) is subjective relative to the knowledge, skill and experience of a particular director

/ Test (ii) – greater knowledge, skill and experience = higher standard of care, skill and diligence

Directors’ duties/ Duty to avoid conflicts of interest

/ director must avoid a situation in which he has, or can have, a direct or indirect interest that conflicts, or possibly may conflict, with the interests of the company

/ applies in particular to exploitation of property, information or opportunity (whether or not company could have taken advantage of it)

/ only applies to dealings with third parties, not with company itself

/ no breach of duty if: (i) situation cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to give rise to conflict of interest; or (ii) non-conflicted directors authorise the matter in question

Directors’ duties

/ Duty not to accept benefits from third parties/ A director must not accept a benefit from a third party

which is given as a result of that person: (i) being a director; or (ii) doing, or not doing, something in their capacity as a director

/ No breach of duty if acceptance of benefit cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to give rise to conflict of interest

Directors’ duties/ Duty to declare interest in proposed transaction or arrangement / If a director is in any way, directly or indirectly, interested in a proposed

transaction or arrangement with the company, he must declare the nature and extent of that interest to the other directors

/ Any such declaration must be made before the company enters into the transaction or arrangement

/ No duty to declare if not aware of interest, transaction or arrangement but directors deemed to be aware of matters of which ought reasonably to be aware

/ Need not declare interest if: (i) cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to give rise to conflict of interest; (ii) other directors aware or ought reasonably to be aware; or (iii) it relates to terms of service contract already considered by directors

/ Best practice – proactive approach to declarations by directors and regular monitoring of interests by company

Shadow Directors

/ A shadow director is a person who provides directions to the directors of a company and the board of directors (or a governing majority thereof) are accustomed to following those instructions

/ Consequences of being considered a shadow director? Given some of the same statutory duties and obligations as any other director

/ Application of Companies Act 2006, Insolvency Act 2986 and Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 to shadow directors

De facto Directors

/ A person who assumes, claims and/or purports to act as a director of a company

/ Occupies the position even if not properly appointed

/ Duties and obligations of directors attach to them

What if breach?

/ Removal of director by ordinary resolution of members of the company (simple majority of members)

/ Proceedings raised against director by company / Derivate action raised by members of company where

company does not pursue/ Petition to court by members for unfair prejudice/ Action by Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

(formerly DTI / BERR) under Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986

Questions

121

Contact

Craig N McKerracherAssociate

Harper Macleod LLP

23 November 2011

t/ 0141 227 9540

e/ [email protected]

BIDS CPD Workshop Nov 2011

Business

Transcript of BIDS CPD Workshop Nov 2011