Research and analysis

West Midlands Combined Authority UKSPF evaluation: impact and value for money findings – executive summary

Updated 28 August 2026

Applies to England

Introduction

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) was launched by the UK Government in April 2022. It provided £2.6 billion funding for local investment by March 2025, with an additional £900 million available for 2025-26. Local decision-makers worked with their local communities and partners to deliver interventions under three investment priorities: Communities and Place, Supporting Local Businesses, and People and Skills. UKSPF empowered places to identify and build on their own local strengths and needs, with a focus on enhancing community pride and increasing life chances.

The West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) is made up of primarily urban areas with major conurbations and comprises seven local authority (LA) areas: Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton. WMCA received £88.4 million of core UKSPF funding across the three priorities: Communities and Place (£25.6 million), Supporting Local Businesses (£46.3million), and People and Skills (£16.4 million), plus £46.5 million for 2025/26.^{[footnote 1]} WMCA’s UKSPF programme aimed to tackle key regional challenges of social mobility, skills gaps, and employment and productivity by building on local strengths, such as a vibrant civil society and competitive sectors in business services and creative and digital industries.

Key impact evaluation findings

Following a review of UKSPF activity and consultation with officers from WMCA and the seven LAs, it was agreed that this evaluation would focus on two of the three UKSPF priorities – Communities and Place, and People and Skills. Supporting Local Businesses was excluded as a separate locally commissioned evaluation of this priority was already underway.

Communities and Place

Improved perception of facilities and place

Refurbishing facilities and improving infrastructure led to better public perception of specific local areas/facilities. For example, UKSPF funding was used to develop the old Erdington swimming baths into an enterprise Hub by Witton Lodge Community Association (WLCA). While this is ongoing, changes to date have begun to alter how the space is perceived and used by the public, with UKSPF used to develop a pocket park in front of the building and contribute to ongoing capital and infrastructure developments. Painting was done by local volunteers, which brought the community together and illustrated residents’ enthusiasm for the project. The Community Life survey (CLS) and the Your Community Your Say Survey (YCYS) also found evidence of improved public perceptions of WMCA. For example, the share of respondents who would recommend their area as a good place to live, that are proud to live in their local area, and find their local area is attractive increased in Birmingham, Coventry, Solihull, Walsall, and Wolverhampton between 2023/24 and 2024/25.^{[footnote 2]} Some caution is needed in interpreting the survey results, as it is not possible to determine the role UKSPF had in influencing attitudes. UKSPF progress monitoring data shows that as of March 2025, 1,133 individuals had reported improved perception of facilities/amenities, and 881 reported improved perception of facility/infrastructure.

Increased usage of facilities

UKSPF funding created new facilities and enhanced existing facilities. This helped funded organisations cater more fully to the needs of the local community, resulting in increased public usage. For example, UKSPF was used to renovate the physical environment of the Coventry Job Shop, including dedicated classrooms providing space for group training and television screens that showcase job vacancies, workshops, and training programs, increasing awareness of what is on offer. The installation of a new multi-language customer sign-in system has supported the Job Shop to reach a wider range of people, as has its move to a city centre location. In Solihull, UKSPF was used to fund the development of four family hubs, which enabled the LA to undertake more enhancements to the buildings than would otherwise have been possible. For example, each hub provides a modern kitchen where small group cookery classes can be run, along with free to access sensory rooms to support Special Education Needs and Disabilities (SEND) children. Dedicated, fully furnished, clinical rooms are also provided, as opposed to an open clinical space.

Increased community engagement and volunteering

UKSPF projects supported attendees to build their networks and confidence, which resulted in them attending additional community programmes and/or pursuing new volunteer or employment opportunities. For example, the Hit Out to Dementia programme in Walsall offered walking cricket sessions for those aged 50 plus. Whist the chance to play cricket was the initial draw, some beneficiaries have gone on to volunteer to help facilitate and promote the sessions. Others have got involved with other programmes offered by the Getting Fit company, including attending talks. Stakeholders consistently reported that without the UKSPF there would have been a reduction in volunteer placements, as no alternative funding was available to support placements. As of March 2025, 190 community led arts cultural heritage and creative programmes were delivered and 2,034 volunteering opportunities were supported.

Increased community capacity

Support for Voluntary, Community, and Social Enterprise (VCSE) organisations enabled them to expand their activities and offer more community led activities, training sessions and/or volunteer placements. For example, the Central Youth Theatre in Wolverhampton used UKSPF to expand their offer to include digital media and backstage theatre training. This allowed them to reach new audiences and helped the theatre to build a volunteer cohort for such work. WLCA in Birmingham used a proportion of their UKSPF funding to host community engagement events, encouraging residents to shape services through providing their views on local issues. Delivery partners consistently reported that these activities would not have occurred at the same scale without UKSPF.

People and Skills

Improved employability

Coaching, job clubs, volunteer/work experience placements, and training courses boosted participants’ confidence and helped them develop and showcase new skills, including communication and teamwork skills, and their work ethic. This improved their perception of their own employability, motivating them to undertake further training or education and/or to engage in job search activities. As of March 2025, 3,091 individuals had engaged in job searching following UKSPF funded support, 1,185 individuals were in education/training following support, 1,661 people reported increased employability through interpersonal skills development, and 1,117 individuals experienced reduced structural barriers to employment and/or skills provision. Stakeholders repeatedly emphasised that without the UKSPF there would have been a significant gap in pre-employment support, as no other funding sources were available.

Skill development

Interventions helped individuals gain qualifications and/or a life/soft skill through coaching, volunteer/work experience placements, and training courses. Stakeholders highlighted that a range of qualifications were obtained by participants, including first aid and fire marshal certification, level 1 and 2 catering and hygiene, business administration, warehouse and logistics, digital skills, and English for Speakers of Other Languages courses. As of March 2025, 162 individuals had gained qualifications/licences and skills. Stakeholders noted that without the UKSPF, fewer training placements would have been provided, reducing the number of qualifications offered and obtained.

Employment

Through enhancing basic skills, life skills and qualifications and/or by undertaking work experience and volunteering opportunities, participants gained and demonstrated job skills, enabling them to secure employment. In cases such as the Beacon Centre for the Blind in Sandwell and Central Youth Theatre in Wolverhampton, this was into opportunities at the UKSPF funded organisation that had provided them with training. For other participants, the support offered by projects such as Coventry Shop Job and Straight Talk in Dudley helped them find employment at other organisations. As of March 2025, 1,250 individuals supported via UKSPF had moved into employment. Stakeholders emphasised that without UKSPF fewer training placements would have been provided, reducing the number of people supported into employment.

Key economic evaluation findings

The UKSPF programme in WMCA demonstrated adequate value for money (VfM) across the 4Es framework.

• Economy – High: WMCA’s UKSPF programme was underpinned by robust procurement and award processes, ensuring that funded projects were selected based on quality, value for money, and alignment with local priorities. There was acknowledgement that the required WMCA and LA approval mechanisms created a time lag between central Government allocating funding to WMCA and funding being made available to delivery partners. However, this process was noted by stakeholders as been vital in attaining VfM, as it enabled funds to be allocated to local organisations who had pre-existing relationships with target communities and understood how to meet their needs.

• Efficiency – Adequate: Most output targets were met or exceeded, and costs were in line with delivery partner expectations informed by projects they had previously run. WMCA and LA officers invested time in identifying priority projects that were not eligible for other funding streams, along with ways to combine UKSPF with other funds to create a joined up ‘pathway’ to employment. For example, UKSPF was used to engage economically inactive residents. These residents could then access education and training funded via the Adult Skills Fund, then employment opportunities created via the Commonwealth Games Legacy Enhancement Fund.

• Effectiveness – Adequate: Many outcome targets were achieved or surpassed, with particularly strong performance in the Communities and Place priority. However, some targets under the People and Skills investment priority were missed due to initial confusion around outcome definitions, which led to overly ambitious targets being set in some cases. Delays in funding allocation also played a part in missed targets. Costs were in line with delivery partner expectations and consistent with previous project delivery.

• Equity – High: Qualitative feedback from stakeholders highlighted that activity was delivered to the target groups set out in the plan, and that these groups were the most appropriate to receive UKSPF support. The ability to reach identified target groups, including vulnerable and/or isolated individuals, the unemployed and economically inactive, and those with no/low qualifications, was a key consideration by LA’s when awarding funding. Additionally, the investment plan included a good level of local evidence and data to justify the focus of projects.

Key learning

The following key learning and lessons have been identified, which will support design and delivery of future local growth funds:

• Tailoring to local needs - the design of UKSPF allowed interventions to be led by local service delivery teams, who were seen as best placed to help local communities due to their deep understanding of local needs.

• Integrating UKSPF with other funds - WMCA took the time to identify projects that could not be funded by other available grants, therefore ensuring UKSPF was used to compliment other funding and reduce duplication.

• Strong partnership working - good relationships between WMCA and LAs and between LAs and community organisations enabled close communication during design and delivery, contributing to high quality delivery.

• Accounting for knock-on effects of approval/devolution processes – due to funding being allocated to WMCA, then onto LAs, then onto delivery partners, organisations reported that by the time they received their funding, they effectively had two months in the first year and six months in the second year to deliver a years’ worth of activity.

• Ensuring clarity and completeness of fund guidance - the flexibility of the funding caused a degree of confusion as to what outputs and outcomes needed to be measured and how to measure them. This led to some targets being overambitious (e.g. due to confusion around the definition of ‘sustained’ employment).

• Data collection frequency - the local WMCA performance reporting system required monthly data collection from LAs. This was generally viewed as burdensome by delivery partners, with time taken away from delivery and spent on reporting.

1. Values do not sum due to rounding. ↩

2. 2024/25 data is as yet unpublished, but access was provided for the purpose of this evaluation. 2023/24 data was drawn from the annual publication. ↩