evaluation of cultural institutions service and infrastructural developments supporting education n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting education PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting education

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 15

Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting education - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 101 Views
  • Uploaded on

Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting education. Bálint Koós Hétfa Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences Research Centre for Economic and Regional Studies (MTA KRTK) 30 April 2013. About the evaluation.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting education' - livia


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
evaluation of cultural institutions service and infrastructural developments supporting education

Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting education

Bálint Koós

Hétfa Research Institute

HungarianAcademy of SciencesResearch Centre for Economic and Regional Studies (MTA KRTK)

30 April 2013

slide2

About the evaluation

Aim of theevaluation:

Evaluation of cultural institutions’ service and infrastructural developments supporting educationbetween 2007–2012.

Grant construction: SROP 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.8, 3.2.9/A,

3.2.11

SIOP 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.3.3

Available budget: 210 million euros – at 2007 exchange rate HUF 52.1 billion. At current exchange rates HUF71.7 billion,

Participated: expertsof the Hétfa Research Institute, MTA KRTK and theRevitaFoundation

methodology
Methodology

Evaluation focuses and methods

the policy environment
The policy environment
  • National DevelopmentConcept:
    • Culture is one of the bases of economic development(improving accessibility and infrastructure development is needed)
  • Directions of culturalmodernisation
    • Culture in the service of national and EU development objectives
  • EU 2007-2013 – culture in itself cannot be supported, however its role in promoting:
    • lifelong learning
    • quality education (talent support) and services tackling early school leaving (inclusion)

serves as a link.

  • Main policy changes affecting cultural institutions:
    • Deterioratingfinancialsituation (staffcuts)
    • Changes in maintainance (county – MIK.)
    • Procurement stop (since 2011)
    • EU fundingforthesupport of education and LLL
fund absorption
Fund absorption
  • 38 calls - huge interest: 2509 applications and 1106 accepted
  • strongly over-applied (56%)
  • Support needs were justified: 96% eligible, (only 12 - 12 applicants – withdrew from implementation)
  • Developments of the cultural institutional system were dominated by the most common maintaning bodies, municipalities:68.6% of the resources, 1600 applications, 665 supported applications.
  • 15,8 per cent were allocated tofinancingchurch, civil, ethnic-minority government and non-profit developments.
  • The middle segment of the municipal hierarchy was supported, that is, cities and county seats (influcenced by Agóra, Agóra Pólus interventions)
fund absorption1
Fund absorption

Emphasis on the disadvantaged micro-regions:

  • 25.6% of the funds contracted were allocated to the 94 disadvantaged micro-regions. Within this, 9.5% of the total amount went to the (47) least advantaged micro-regions.
  • An additional 6.5% to municipalities with high unemployment rate.
  • The importance of this is further enhanced by the fact that the large volume infrastrutural development programmes were also implemented in the most advantaged territories/cities (Agóra, Agóra Pólus)
impact and results
Impact and results
  • Services of supported cultural institutions have been modernised and expanded, the infrastructural situation has improved
  • Learning process: cultural institutions, although inexperienced in application, performed outstandingly as beneficiaries
  • Appreciation of lifelong learning programmes– for museums this is a significant change (museum education appreciation)
  • Interventions were well-received – the target group deemed services provided useful
  • The access to services supporting lifelong learning has improved (countryside!)
  • However: the solvent demand for services is moderate – strong selection already in the maintenance phase!
  • The synergic effect is limited (unintended positive effects mainly in the case of projects related to tourism)
impact and results1
Impact and results

Effect of intervention on cultural institutions, the results of statictical model (Stata, diff-diff )

Control

Treatment group

Museums

impact and results2
Impact and results

Effect of intervention on cultural institutions, the results of statictical model (Stata, diff-diff )

Control

Treatment group

Public culture institutions

impact and results3
Impact and results

Ratio of digital catologues, %

Effect of intervention on cultural institutions, the results of statictical model (Stata, diff-diff )

Control

Treatment group

Libraries

impact and results5
Impact and results
  • The range of visitors-users has been rearranged: the proportion of 5-18-year-olds and the elderly has increased- disadvantaged groups only temporarily (further interventions are needed for this target group!!!)
  • Cultural institutions have „opened” – their social-professional connectivity has strengthened (lasting connections have been created especially with educational institutions: according to the NDA’s calculations 1723 co-operation agreements have been established)
  • Polarisingculturalinstitutionalsystem(„thelargerones vs. those who have been left out” and the small ones with „development potential” attached to the large ones)
  • The intervention has strengthened all the key competencies necessary for lifelong learning, largest effect made on cultural and digital key competences
recommendations
Recommendations
  • It is justifiedtofollowthecurrentdevelopmentpath
  • It is justified to develop the services of cultural institutions supporting lifelong learning and quality education in the Central-Hungary Region
  • Dissemination: broaddissemination of experiences and goodpractices
  • Large emphasis should be laid on the improvement of the accessibility of cultural institutions services (disabled accessibility, travel expenses of visitors, travelling-exhibition, mobile equipments)
  • In order to support quality education, the central IT infrastructure should be improved (especially museums, archives)
recommendations1
Recommendations
  • There should be incentives for the creation and maintenance of professional and interdisciplinary co-operations (consortium, collaborations)
  • Based on the experience of interventions targeting the development of competencies, recurring, regular programmes are effective; it is justified to promote them.
  • Project implementers should have greater freedom (and responsibility) in the creation of professional content. In connection with this, it is adviseable to differentiate expected activities along quantity and quality (based on size and level of service).
thank you for your attention

Thankyouforyourattention!

Hétfa Research Institute

H-1051 Budapest

Október 6. utca 19.

www.hetfa.hu