Research and analysis

Newcastle-under-Lyme UKSPF evaluation: interim findings

Updated 3 December 2025

Applies to England

1. Executive summary: Newcastle-Under-Lyme 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 Newcastle-Under-Lyme (NUL), 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

• An internal group of Newcastle-Under-Lyme Borough Council (NULBC) officers and the Newcastle Shared Prosperity Board (NSPB) co-developed the original investment plan.
• An external consultancy was appointed to help with the assessment of intervention projects. The consultancy developed “prioritisation criteria” and evaluated the 46 project Expression of Interests (EOIs) to help NULBC and NSPB assess applications. Short listed applicants were then asked to submit full applications.
• Prior to the start of the interventions, the external delivery organisations signed a grant funding agreement with NULBC. And new relationships were forged with some delivery partners, including formal contractual relationships with local academic institutions, leveraging rich local expertise.
• The design of the initial set of interventions was viewed as effective given the request for funding by a wide range of intervention projects.

Portfolio implementation

• The commissioning and implementation of the UKSPF portfolio was weighted towards Communities and Place, highlighting the need to revitalise the local area as a starting point to improve community engagement within the region.
• Grant agreements were utilised to minimise risks in the delivery of projects, but due to delays in setting up agreements and issuing funding, some organisations progressed delivery at risk.

Intervention delivery

• A mix of stakeholders including both internal NULBC and external organisations were involved in delivery.
• Local businesses and public organisations also collaborated with interventions, providing access to venues and expertise.
• A mix of skills and knowledge was required across interventions, particularly for Supporting Local Businesses programmes, where highly skilled academics used their expertise to support businesses engaging with their projects.
• Key enablers of successful delivery included strong relationships, a flexible and adaptable approach to UKSPF delivery, and interventions effectively reaching their target audiences.
• Some interventions faced challenges due to the phasing out of European funding (ERDF), delays in project starts, and achieving local residents’ buy-in for capital projects.

Data collection and monitoring

• A local data and monitoring approach was established to collate data and feed into monthly reporting. Informal meetings and data submissions supplement more formal quarterly meetings to review monitoring data. Quarterly performance reports from all interventions capture quantitative data, financial updates, and narrative on delivery. This is reported to be manageable and working well, and delivery partners noted the synergies and learnings being incorporated from the wider cohort of projects.

Programme oversight

• Oversight of UKSPF in NUL was led by the Newcastle Shared Prosperity Board (NSPB), this process was described positively by stakeholders.
• Governance also involved coordination with other existing funding streams, which complemented UKSPF, including the Towns Deal Fund and Future High Streets Fund. These funds both had overlaps with the Communities and Place UKSPF investment priority.
• UKSPF funding was deployed to ensure other funds were not being crowded out, and was used to achieve synergies with these other funding streams. For example, capital funding from the Towns Deal Fund was complemented by resource funding from UKSPF.

1.3 Progress to date: expenditure, outputs and outcomes

As of September 2024, UKSPF in NUL has been broadly on track in terms of expenditure. With an allocation of £4.84 million for the 3 years from 2022 to 2025 and an additional £1.6 million for 2025/6.

Overall, a strong performance has been seen in achieving the outputs set for Communities and Place, with targets already achieved for several output measures and others on track to be reached by end-March 2025. Additional outputs are expected as most of these interventions will continue into 2025/26.

Overall, outcomes are broadly on track, with some investment priorities showing more progress than others. This is primarily due to projects starting and finishing earlier than originally anticipated.

Communities and Place performance has been strong, with over 90% of targets achieved across most outcome areas. A standout success is the increase in footfall, driven by NUL’s 850th anniversary celebrations, nature recovery projects, heritage enhancements, and other cross-cutting initiatives, with 34,066 people recorded as visiting the area.

In the Supporting Local Businesses investment priority, all outcome areas are either close to or have reached their forecast for this stage of delivery. There has been a significant increase in the number of enterprises supported, largely driven by the enterprise support project and collaborations with stakeholders such as Staffordshire University and Keele University.

In the People and Skills investment priority most activity is expected to take place during 2024/25, and many outcomes are yet to be achieved. The only exception is the outcome related to the number of people in employment, where the programme has exceeded expectations by achieving 163% of the target (13 people against a target of 8).

1.4 Early impact findings

Across most interventions it is still too early for impact evidence to emerge. However, some indicative outcomes evidence suggests some positive impacts from UKSPF, particularly in business-related projects. Beneficiaries and stakeholders report successful collaborations involving businesses, academics and students, with newly formed relationships contributing to early impacts.

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