Welcome, by Jeremy Simmons, FaithAction
Welcomed participants to the session, and began by outlining the purpose of the Faith Covenant Evaluation research:
The project is an evaluation of the Faith Covenant, which has been in existence for over a decade but has never previously been formally evaluated.
The evaluation began in September (previous year).
It is conducted in partnership with Coventry University (led by Dr Dan Range).
Funded by the Sir Halley Stewart Trust.
33 local authorities have signed the Covenant, covering approximately 12 million people.
Objectives of the Evaluation:
- Assess the effectiveness of the Faith Covenant.
- Identify best practice and successful models.
- Understand barriers and challenges.
- Develop guidance and a best practice handbook.
- Support future implementation through workshops, consultancy calls, and networking platforms.
Findings of the Evaluation, by Dr Daniel Range, Lead Evaluator, Coventry University
Presented the initial findings from the research:
Data Collection
22 in-depth stakeholder interviews (with more scheduled).
36 survey responses (from approx. 100 invited).
Coverage across at least 14 Covenant areas.
Mix of faith sector and local authority respondents.
Minimal overlap between interview and survey participants.
Approach
Iterative research process: data collected and analysed in stages.
Emergent themes identified and incorporated into subsequent interviews.
Triangulation between qualitative (interviews) and quantitative (survey) data.
High data saturation — no significantly new themes emerging at later stages.
Impact on Trust, Collaboration and Joint Working
Overall Impact
~60% agreed or strongly agreed that the Covenant had a tangible real-world impact.
~75% agreed it helped build trust.
~56% reported a sense of joint ownership.
Key Insight: The Covenant works best when…
Relationships already exist.
It formalises and strengthens existing collaboration.
Quote summarised
“The Covenant didn’t create relationships from scratch but gave confidence, mandate, and structure to deepen collaboration.”
Important Caveat
Signing alone does not guarantee success.
Without a clear purpose, Covenants may drift after signing.
Crisis Response and Resilience
One of the strongest findings:
In areas where the Covenant was well established, responses to crises (e.g., COVID-19, social tensions) were quicker and more coordinated.
The Covenant provides:
- Established communication channels.
- Trust networks.
- Mandate for quicker decision-making.
- Empowerment of junior staff to act.
This was identified as a key “business case” for the Covenant.
What Makes the Covenant Work Well?
Continuity of Key People
Particularly within local authorities.
Staff turnover significantly weakens momentum.
Loss of “institutional memory” causes drift.
Named Responsibility
Works best when it is part of someone’s job description.
Avoids reliance on generic inboxes or ad hoc ownership.
Embedding in Policy
Where Covenant principles are written into strategic plans (e.g., five-year plans), impact is stronger.
Institutional embedding sustains momentum beyond individuals.
Clear Purpose at Signing
Works best when signed to address a specific need.
Weakest when signed symbolically without follow-up plans.
Barriers and Gaps
Key barriers identified:
- Staff turnover.
- Lack of resourcing (financial and staffing).
- Poor governance and accountability.
- Over-reliance on one party (often the local authority).
- Geopolitical tensions (e.g., Gaza conflict affecting local cohesion work).
- Geography and scale issues.
- Rurality and large geographic areas.
Geography and Scale
A major emergent finding was around the effect of geography and scale of Faith Covenant areas:
- Smaller local authority areas tend to see stronger impact.
- Larger county-level covenants struggle with:
- Travel distances.
- Weaker shared identity.
- Online-only engagement.
- Reduced cohesion.
- Rurality was confirmed as a factor that will be included in the final report.
Questions from Participants
Peter Rookes, Birmingham
To what extent did the Civil Society Covenant affect the evaluation?
How did changes in key cabinet members affect outcomes?
Answer
The Civil Society Covenant came up inconsistently during interviews. Some see opportunity for alignment, others fear it may dilute or “invisibilise” faith. Success depends on clear purpose and need.
Staff and political turnover significantly affect continuity and impact.
Kwabena Osayande, West Midlands
Shared that the Combined Authority are exploring combining the Faith and Civil Society Covenants regionally to strengthen both.
Answer
The Faith Covenant makes faith visible within civil society though a risk exists that faith could become obscured if merged without care.
Simon Philips, Leeds
Was the number of survey responses sufficient and representative?
Answer
The survey was intentionally long for depth.
36 responses with strong alignment to interview findings is robust for triangulation.
This is evaluative research, not statistical precision.
Data consistency across methods builds confidence.
Reynold Rosenberg, Hertfordshire
The two Covenants he is involved with have stalled after signing. What should be done now to attempt to reinvigorate them?
Answer
Honesty is essential.
Bring stakeholders together to assess:
- Was signing seen as the end goal?
- Is there sufficient resourcing?
- Is geography too large?
- Is there a pressing need?
Challenges vary by context.
Steve Botham, West Midlands
Covenant meetings can feel boring and task-light. What tangible outputs are examples of success?
Answer
Strong outputs occur where scale is manageable, clear needs exist and local identity is strong.
Examples of this could include joint events, capacity building, crisis response coordination or training and forums.
Some large-scale areas may need smaller, localised covenant structures, especially where the populations may be geographically spread out or there are large populations.
Next Steps, by Dr Daniel Range
- Final report to FaithAction by early March.
- Launch event to follow.
- Best Practice Handbook due September 2026.
- Ongoing implementation phase until 2027.
- Workshops, peer mentoring, consultancy calls planned.
- Online networking channel to be developed.
Participants were encouraged to take part in interviews, contribute case studies, and attend the launch event.
Close of meeting
Daniel Singleton closed the session, emphasising that the Covenant’s apolitical, cross-party nature is a strength. Local government reorganisation may significantly affect future impact and that continued engagement and action are essential.