« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
1. In 2003, the Scottish Executive's Environment and Rural Affairs Department ( SEERAD) launched, and has since then, funded, the Rural Community Gateway 1 ( RCG) to act as a 'one-stop shop'; and to develop further as an 'online community'. In 2005, SEERAD commissioned an independent evaluation of the RCG. The aim of this evaluation was to gauge the performance of the RCG and to examine options for its viability via alternative funding.
2. There were 4 objectives of the RCG Evaluation:
(i) To evaluate the Gateway against the objectives set out at its inception;
(ii) To locate the Gateway in the prevailing community web environment;
(iii) To explore possible further developments/improvements to the Gateway with regular users and irregular users; and
(iv) To explore the future of the Gateway in terms of direction and sustainability.
METHODOLOGY
3. A mixed method approach to data collection was used including: a desk study, an online survey and a series of workshops with both frequent and infrequent users. The desk study enabled the evaluator to contextualise the focus of the primary data collection, and to locate the RCG within the wider 'community web environment'. The online survey was used to gather information about the users themselves and their assessment of the RCG, while the workshops were used to explore the issues further.
FINDINGS OF THE RURAL COMMUNITY GATEWAY EVALUATION
4. People's experiences of using the RCG: The main reasons stated by the respondents of the survey for using the RCG were:
- following up on specific issues/news,
- finding out about funding opportunities, and
- feeling a part of the rural community.
The RCG was seen as a valuable source of information, useful for finding out what other communities were doing, and passing on information to others. When asked what they did not like about the RCG, respondents highlighted layout, navigation, and the need for a clear statement of "mission" or purpose.
5. Is the Gateway fulfilling its objectives? In the online survey, over 60% of respondents felt that the RCGhad met its objective as a one-stop shop. Almost half the respondents felt that the RCG was an online community to some extent.
6. The Gateway compared with other websites and portals: Two-thirds of survey respondents stated that the RCG was the first place they go to for rural information and/or contacts. Half stated that the Gateway did give unique rural, unbiased information which pulled together many rural resources on one site. Its advantages were listed as its regular updates and the range of topics covered. Its disadvantages were the depth and geography of coverage, navigation, management and explanation of information and expectations.
7. Suggested improvements to the Gateway included:
- clarity over 'brand' or 'mission';
- additional content and links;
- improved marketing;
- changes in layout and organisation of information;
- clarity concerning the "impact" of discussions and polls;
- encouraging more contributions from existing users; and
- increased Gaelic language content.
8. How should the Gateway be sustained? The consensus amongst respondents was that the RCG should continue to be funded by SEERAD. The RCG had provided an important and valued service in the past, and the qualities and outputs of the RCG legacy should be maintained as a service to engage people in rural Scotland.
9. Issues in management and delivery: There were concerns over who was not being reached, for example, micro-enterprises, farming, and forestry, and the need to investigate whether the Gateway was providing a service to agencies rather than individuals. There was a need to debate the notion, and practice, of 'online community' as appropriate to the needs of people in rural Scotland. The unique selling points of the RCG also needed to be developed and identified. It was critical to bring together a wider group of stakeholders, in order to debate and develop ideas concerning the best ways forward. There was a need to develop more appropriate indicators to complement existing Performance Indicators. Finally, it was important to note that such reflection, strategic thinking, and specific planning, needed to be additionally resourced.
10. Assessment of other websites and portals: Eight rural websites or portals were investigated using an Evaluation Protocol, in order to assess their key features and implications for how the RCG might develop. The key finding for RCG was the need to state the mission and outline benefits of membership.
CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The following are the main conclusions and policy implications from the evaluation:
11. The Gateway must have a stated aim or mission. The site needs to appear rural to differentiate itself from other sites.
12. The Gateway must differentiate itself from other search engines and information sites, by adding value. The Gateway needs to categorise and organise the information, so that it is searchable according to Themes, Geography and Publisher.
13. The value of becoming a Member must be identified and there needs to be a link between the database and the interactive map.
14. A "Your Gateway" concept and tools need to be developed through an 'enabling infrastructure' which supports participation and contribution, including through sub-groups.
15. There should be a strategy for improving the marketing of the website. There needs to be 'internal marketing' - both to current external RCG members and users, and internally within the Scottish Executive.
16. SEERAD should continue to fund the Gateway. A 'Business Planning and Next Steps Phase' should be separately resourced, to enable strategic and operational planning, for a sustainableRCG for Scotland.
« Previous | Contents | Next »