Minutes:
Kirsty Cheetham, Senior Communications Officer:
a) provided the Board with a Communications Update presentation. During consideration of the update, the following points were noted: -
· Cornhill Market won the Regeneration and Restoration Project of the Year Award and news of the award had been shared on City of Lincoln Council platforms. Lindum and Ruddocks created their own content regarding the award. Consideration had been given to Looking to Pineapple Awards and it was hoped that Cornhill Market may be entered in order that the project and the quality of renovation be celebrated
· Work had continued on a successful ongoing video series that documented Greyfriars which revolved around both the history and the future of the project The videos had been received positively and comments had been received from individuals that remembered the building fondly and looked forward to learning of the funding planned for restoration
· Reference was made to UK Shared Prosperity Funding (UKSPF). Mooreland Community Centre works were completed a couple of months ago and a video had been created that promoted the centre and the events that could now be hosted due to the funding received
· Sudbrooke Drive Community Hub – Progression had been made and a before and after video would be created that captured the extensive works carried out. Members of the centre would be interviewed and the impact on the local area highlighted
· Eulogy, an immersive event funded by Lincoln Connected, had been promoted and highlighted how vibrant the Town Deal funding was
· A video with Selina form Bubble kiss had been filmed and two members from Lincoln City Foundation would also be interviewed
· Work had taken place with Senior Communications Officers regarding a communications release in order that the success of the programme to date, be celebrated. Discussions with the Institute of Place Management had taken place regarding distribution on a national scale
b) welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Board.
The Chair offered thanked Kirsty Cheetham for the update and welcomed comments and questions. Members of the Board discussed the content of the update in further detail and the following questions and comments emerged:
Comment: The link between Selina and Lincoln City Foundation was positive and demonstrated how successful the Town Deal funding had been. It was a lovely story.
Question: How was success with communications measured? Was it only digital or had comms taken place any other ways? There was an incredible amount of positive activity taking place and it was important that the whole of Lincoln received that information.
Repsonse: Information on engagement and impressions was contained within a monthly social media report. Communications took place mainly digitally however discussions would be initiated with the Communications Manager regarding print versions.
Comment: The intention was that a monitoring and evaluation report of the projects would be created. An interim report had been created and reported to Board in December 2023. The objective was that a final report would be created for December 2025. It may be useful that an annual update be presented to members at the next meeting of the Board in order that the outputs be pulled together and documented.
Comment: The programme was successful in the reporting of granular activity into the Ministry. However, it was important that the outputs, outcomes and project activity was promoted. It was important that projects were brought to life.
Comment: Members of the Board benefitted from significant marketing experience. It would be positive to investigate the possibility of a small project group in order that expertise be shared. Expressions of Interest were welcomed further to the meeting.
Comment: It was important that communications were not measured only in clicks and views. It was important to consider if individuals visited and spent money also.
Question: Was there a budget for digital marketing?
Response: A budget for digital marketing had not been given. Everything done was organic which hindered effective communications. Boosted Facebook posts were payable.
Question: Was there ability to use some of the funding towards digital marketing?
Response: There was an administrative and programme management element to the funding.
Supplementary Question: Was expenditure from the underspend within programme available only for capital spend?
Supplementary Response: The question would be investigated further to the meeting and the findings brought to the working group. There was an appetite to amplify communications.
Comment: It was important to acknowledge that the Board was at the stage of promotion. The Market Group put in the bid for the East Midlands Regeneration Project award and there were other bids desired in the future. Any knowledge on nomination writing from Members of the Board would be welcomed.
Comment: There was an extra dimension such as if the people of Lincoln felt more positive about where they lived because of the projects. It was not always about the activity that could be easily measured. It was important that the people of Lincoln were informed about the work of the projects.
Response: Softer benefits could be measured with social impact toolkits.
RESOLVED that:
1) The secretariate be tasked with the circulation of an invitation to Members for expressions of interest to form a working group.
2) The Communications update be noted with thanks.