Research and analysis

Hastings UKSPF evaluation: interim findings

Updated 3 December 2025

Applies to England

1. Executive summary: Hastings interim findings

1.1 Introduction

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) provides a total of £3.5 billion of funding for local investment over 4 years (2022 to 2026), with all places in the UK receiving an allocation via a funding formula. Local decision-makers work with their local communities and partners to deliver interventions under three investment priorities: Communities and Place, Supporting Local Businesses and People and Skills.

This interim report presents the emerging findings from the place level evaluation of UKSPF in Hastings, based on research conducted between December 2024 and March 2025. It outlines the progress made to date and presents interim evaluation findings.

1.2 Key process evaluation findings

Intervention design

• The allocation of UKSPF by formula rather than competitive bidding enabled Hastings Borough Council (HBC) to tailor interventions to the specific needs of the community, supported faster decision-making and more responsive programme adjustments.
• Limited time to submit Investment Plans hindered planning, insight development, research, and public consultation. It also made it difficult to gather reliable baseline data on community engagement and facility use, creating difficulties for tracking progress.
• The delivery team had concerns about the funding allocation algorithm. Hastings had previously received more funding from European funding streams (European Structural and Investment Funds, ESIF).
• HBC employed a “Target Area Approach” to concentrate the majority of investments in one area of the Hastings, Broomgrove, in order to maximise the impact of the funding while avoiding a dilution of its effects throughout the borough.

Portfolio implementation

• HBC used a co-commissioning approach for much of the portfolio, working with existing partners to design and deliver UKSPF-funded interventions. This allowed the council to align projects with investment plan goals and leverage local expertise. Open tenders were used for cultural, business, and skills initiatives, making up a third of the portfolio’s value.
• Supplier engagement activity successfully generated 14 good quality applications for creative community grants. Applicants found the process simple and flexible, appreciating the freedom to submit proposals in their own format. Stakeholders valued the one-stage process and the ability to include images and detailed explanations instead of using a rigid template.
• HBC’s contractual arrangements generally ensured suppliers met activity targets, but delays in the council’s legal processes slowed delivery, especially for early interventions.

Intervention delivery

• Intervention delivery was reported to have worked well overall, with no significant challenges for HBC or the delivery organisations.
• Effective delivery was aided by direct, personalised engagement of beneficiaries, a welcoming environment, and minimal administrative burden. This helped build trust and a sense of ownership in the local area and remove barriers to participation. Volunteers also played a key role in delivering several projects.
• Obstacles to smooth delivery included the lack of suitable venues for project activities during the refurbishment of the community centre and challenges securing resident engagement.

Data collection and monitoring

• Monitoring requirements for UKSPF in Hastings have generally been well-balanced, ensuring accountability without overburdening delivery organisations.
• Stakeholders emphasised that the depth of engagement was a key indicator of success, with case studies providing more in-depth insights into participant outcomes and the projects’ overall impact.
• Delivery organisations used a variety of data collection methods, such as attendance records, demographic tracking, and case study development.
• Tracking progress was challenging when the links between funding and outcomes were indirect or unclear. Inconsistent data formats also made it hard to compare results across interventions.

Programme oversight

• Hastings’ UKSPF programme is managed by a HBC team, supported by the Local Strategic Partnership board (LSP), involved in the initial scoping of the fund, and advised by the Investment Panel set up for the programme.
• Compared to other programmes, e.g. ESIF, UKSPF was more flexible, but also had less well-defined objectives and reporting structures, which presented a challenge in ensuring consistency in reporting from delivery partners.

1.3 Progress to date: expenditure, outputs and outcomes

Hastings received £1 million of UKSPF funding to cover the 3-year delivery period from 2022 to 2025. An additional £474,000 was allocated for 2025/26. Some 78.5%, of funding was allocated to Communities and Place interventions, 11.5% to Supporting Local Businesses, and 10% to People and Skills. For years 1 to 3 approximately two thirds of the allocation went to revenue spend and a third to capital.

Analysis of Monitoring information shows some progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes.

Under Communities and Place, UKSPF funding created/improved 480m² of green/blue space (3 organisations received funds, 13 non-financial support). Resident engagement included 3 new volunteering opportunities, 9 cultural events (332 people), and 7 community programmes (280 people) and Broomgrove community centre improvements are expected to be completed by 2024/25.

Business support interventions provided non-financial assistance to 170 businesses (target 100). The RISE programme of business support exceeded its target, reaching 175 clients (target 108). The RISE Growth and Innovation Network has 15 regular attendees, and workshops have been well-received. Early data suggests 4 jobs have been protected.

Under People and Skills projects, 50 people received educational support and 17 received employment assistance, while 17 saw reduced barriers to employment/skills (50% of target).

1.4 Early impact findings

As 88% of UKSPF funding is being spent during the year 2024/25, it is too early to identify intervention impacts. However, early evidence suggests that community engagement projects have contributed to improved physical activity and health, and a social supermarket has improved access to assistance. Capital investment to improve the adventure playground and the community centre are expected to bring further opportunities for active engagement and volunteering.

Business support offered by the RISE programme has helped local businesses, and monitoring data returns show good progress against quantitative targets, especially jobs created and safeguarded.

Support for skills development has enabled a number of positive steps towards improving skills and employment prospects, although monitoring data suggested that some output targets had not been achieved by the end of 2023/24.

The outcomes and impact of UKSPF in Hastings will be explored in more depth in the final evaluation report.