20 Years of Lottery Funding of Heritage in Local Areas:
Bradford
A report prepared by BritainThinks for the Heritage Lottery Fund
February 2015
Contents
1.
Executive summary ....................................................................... 5
Life in Bradford .............................................................................. 5
Local heritage................................................................................ 5
HLF in Bradford .............................................................................. 5
2.
Introduction and methodology .......................................................... 6
Objectives .................................................................................... 6
Methodology.................................................................................. 6
Area of study ................................................................................. 7
Background research ........................................................................ 8
Stakeholder research ....................................................................... 8
3.
Background research ................................................................... 12
Life in Bradford ............................................................................ 12
Investment in local heritage ............................................................. 14
4.
HLF‟s Bradford stakeholders .......................................................... 17
Views of Bradford ......................................................................... 17
Bradford‟s heritage ....................................................................... 18
Heritage‟s role in society ................................................................ 19
Attitudes toward HLF ..................................................................... 20
5.
Local residents of Bradford ........................................................... 23
Views of Bradford ......................................................................... 24
Bradford‟s heritage ....................................................................... 27
Heritage funding over time in Bradford ................................................ 32
The importance of heritage overall .................................................... 34
National importance ...................................................................... 34
Local importance .......................................................................... 34
Personal importance ...................................................................... 37
Views on heritage funding overall ...................................................... 40
2
What makes small and large heritage projects successful .......................... 42
Appendix 1: Local resident workshop (in depth) ........................................ 45
Objectives .................................................................................. 45
Recruitment ................................................................................ 46
Structure and content of the workshop ................................................ 47
Filming ...................................................................................... 47
Incentives................................................................................... 47
Atmosphere at the workshop ............................................................ 48
Examples of workshop materials ........................................................ 48
Free-writing exercise .................................................................. 48
5 things about Bradford: ............................................................... 49
Obituary exercise: ...................................................................... 50
Birth announcement exercise: ........................................................ 51
Agenda for the workshop ................................................................. 52
Appendix 2: Stakeholder discussion guide ................................................ 61
Appendix 3: Local residents survey questionnaire ...................................... 64
Section 1: Views of Bradford as a place to live ....................................... 64
Section 2: Engagement with heritage .................................................. 65
Section 3: Awareness and visits to HLF funded sites in Bradford................... 67
Section 4: Local quality of life .......................................................... 69
Demographics .............................................................................. 71
Note on definitions: ....................................................................... 71
Appendix 4: Overview of HLF investment in Bradford .................................. 73
3
4
1. Executive summary
Life in Bradford

Local residents strongly believe that the area has deteriorated over the
course of their residence. The background research and stakeholder
perspective support this perception of decline.

Residents value the cultural diversity of Bradford, (especially food and
fashion), the surrounding countryside, and the parks and green spaces.
However, they also believe that the area looks neglected, with a poor retail
offer, weak local economy, high crime rates and lots of litter.
Local heritage

Awareness of local heritage is high, with both residents and stakeholders
deeming it particularly important in Bradford. Areas like Little Germany,
Saltaire, the prominent mills, and the city centre‟s architecture were the
most frequently referenced highlights.

Engagement with local heritage is also generally high, although it varies by
life stage and family circumstances. Satisfaction with the local heritage on
offer is also high and experiences of visiting are positive, although residents
thought that more could be done to attract and engage local people,
particularly through publicity and promotion.

Heritage is widely seen as important by Bradford‟s residents: important for
the country, for the local area, and for them personally. Heritage is seen as
important by frequent visitors; but it is also seen as being of wider
importance for local residents, in terms of improving the quality of life in
the area and strengthening local pride, as well as attracting visitors.
HLF in Bradford

Local residents believe that Bradford‟s heritage has improved over time,
although to a lesser extent than in the other locations featured in this
study. Stakeholders questioned how visible investment has been.

Local residents have little awareness or understanding of how Lottery
funding of heritage sites and projects works but, on reflection, they are
broadly positive about Lottery funding of heritage.

Local residents thought that a successful heritage project should be
accessible, inclusive and well-publicised. Larger projects should also attract
visitors and businesses to the area, while smaller projects should have more
of a community focus, strengthening local pride or developing skills.
Compared with the other eleven locations featured in this project, residents of
Bradford are particularly negative about the area as a place to live and very likely
to think it has deteriorated over their time of residence. They are also less likely to
have noticed investment in the area‟s heritage – and the positive impacts of local
heritage sites and projects are less widely perceived.
5
2. Introduction and methodology
Objectives
The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) was established in 1994 to sustain the UK‟s
heritage by investing in projects that will have a lasting impact on the communities
and areas in which they are located. Since then, it has allocated more than £6
billion to nearly 40,000 projects across the UK.
To celebrate this achievement, and to mark its 20th anniversary, HLF commissioned
BritainThinks to conduct research in 12 locations across the UK.
The aim of the research is to understand the cumulative impact of HLF investment.
Methodology
In order to select the locations for this research, all locations where HLF has
invested money were banded by population size. Twelve locations were then
selected at random, and their suitability for research assessed by HLF before the
final list was compiled.
Quantitative research and desk research were carried out in all 12 locations. In
addition, qualitative research, comprising in-depth stakeholder interviews and a
workshop with members of the general public was carried out in six of the 12
locations.
Bradford was one of the locations selected for all strands of research. The
following section sets out the approach taken.
6
Area of study
The research was focused on understanding the perceptions of people living in the
area shown in the map below, bounded by a 5km radius circle around Bradford city
centre. The map also shows the location of the HLF funded projects that were
featured in the quantitative research, to see what benefits they had for local
residents. This featured eight projects within the 5km circle and two – South
Pennine Moors and Saltaire – that are further out.
Map Data: Google
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
National Media Museum
Lister Park
Bradford Industrial Museum
Cartwright Hall Art Gallery
Bradford Bulls/Odsall Stadium Rugby League Archive
Saltaire World Heritage Site
Heaton Woods
Historic building restoration work in Bradford City Centre
South Pennine Moors
Historic building work in the Manningham area
All grant award figures refer to HLF funding within this area and are up to date to
the end of September 2013
7
Background research
Desk research was carried out in order to contextualise the subsequent stages of
the research process by examining how the local area had changed over the two
decades since HLF was established. Sources used include: UK Census, Nomis/ONS,
DCLG Index of Multiple Deprivation, Bradford City Council records, and the
Heritage Lottery Fund‟s internal data.
Stakeholder research
In order to understand the impact of HLF funding on Bradford, BritainThinks
conducted six in-depth telephone interviews with stakeholders. Each interview
lasted between 30 and 35 minutes.
Before starting recruitment, BritainThinks and HLF agreed a list of five stakeholder
types. The categories were as follows:





Academia
o For example: Programme Director, Lecturer in a relevant subject
Business
o For example: Senior representatives of trade bodies, chambers of
commerce
Community/voluntary sector
o For example: Senior representatives of local community groups and
voluntary organisations
Local government
o For example: Senior figures in relevant departments including
Neighbourhoods, Regeneration, Economy, Enterprise
Tourism and culture
o For example: Senior representatives of tourist organisations such as
VisitEngland
A sample frame was drawn up by BritainThinks in collaboration with HLF, with
stakeholders designated either priority one or priority two.
Once the sample was complete, all priority one stakeholders were sent an email
inviting them to take part. The email was co-signed by BritainThinks and HLF, and
set out the aims of the research and what the interview would consist of. By way
of incentive, all stakeholders were offered a summary of the research findings.
This email was then followed up by a phone call from a member of the
BritainThinks team, asking whether or not stakeholders would like to participate
and arranging a time and date for the interview.
Once priority one sample had been exhausted, the same process was then repeated
with the priority two stakeholders in those categories where an interview had not
already been secured.
Two stakeholders were interviewed from the „Community/voluntary sector‟
category. One stakeholder was interviewed from all other categories. Four priority
one and two priority two stakeholders were interviewed. Interviews were
conducted between 14th April and 4th June 2014.
8
Interviews were conducted by members of the BritainThinks team using a
discussion guide that was drawn up in collaboration with HLF. A copy of this
discussion guide can be found in the appendix.
Workshop
In order to understand the public‟s view of heritage funding in Bradford,
BritainThinks held a half-day workshop on 18th March 2014 with 14 members of the
public.
A specialist recruiter recruited residents living in Bradford. Residents living in the
following postcode areas were eligible for recruitment:





BD1 – BD9
BD10 8
BD12 0
BD18 1
BD18 2




BD18 3
BD19 3
BD19 4
BD19 6
In addition, the following requirements were also set for recruitment:









Equal numbers of men and women
Equal numbers of those with children living at home and those without
children living at home
A range of ages
A range of social grades
A representative mix of ethnicities
A range of levels of engagement with heritage
A mix of levels of Lottery playing
All participants had to be eligible to pay tax in the UK
Those working in market research, the media, museums or galleries, the
arts or for galleries were excluded from the research
The workshop was held in the Cartwright Hall Art Gallery. Participants were
divided into two tables of seven, with a mix of participants on each table.
Over the course of the four-hour session, participants took part in a series of table
and plenary discussions covering:




Their views of Bradford
Their attitude towards and engagement with local heritage
The benefits of heritage
What criteria should be used to judge whether or not a heritage project has
been successful
In addition, a number of exercises were used throughout the day to build
knowledge, stimulate discussion and gauge personal feelings and responses. The
following exercises were used:


A pre-task: All participants were asked to bring to the workshop an item or
picture that represented what Bradford‟s heritage meant to them
A „free writing‟ exercise: participants were given 5 minutes and asked to
write down everything that came to mind when they thought of heritage
9






A table brainstorm to generate lists of the 5 best things about Bradford, the
5 worst things about Bradford and 5 things that have improved about
Bradford in recent years
Two short presentations, one from a representative of a large project that
had received HLF funding in Bradford and one from a representative of a
smaller project
A table brainstorm to generate a list of rules for what a good small/large
local heritage project looks like, followed by a presentation from each table
A birth announcement exercise: participants were asked to imagine that a
new small local heritage site/project was being created and write a birth
announcement for it
An obituary exercise: participants were asked to imagine that all the local
heritage had died, and wrote its obituary using questions as prompts
Funding application exercise: participants were asked to design an
application form for funding for a small/large project, before reversing
roles and completing the application form, imagining that they were part of
a team applying for funding for a small/large local heritage project
The workshop was run using a discussion guide drawn up by BritainThinks in
collaboration with HLF. A copy of this guide – which details the discussion topics
and exercises - can be found in Appendix One.
With participants‟ consent, the workshop was filmed, and some participants also
took part in „vox pop‟ interviews, discussing their impressions of the afternoon.
Participants received an incentive to compensate them for their time and cover
any costs they may have incurred as a result of attending.
Quantitative research
This stage of the research consisted of a telephone survey with 350 Bradford
residents.
The survey was approximately 13 minutes long, and fieldwork was conducted
between 25th November and 5th December 2013.
The survey was conducted using a random digit dialling methodology, targeting
residents living within a defined set of postcode areas in a five-kilometre radius of
the centre of Bradford. The following postcode areas were eligible for
participation:





BD1 – BD9
BD10 8
BD12 0
BD18 1
BD18 2




BD18 3
BD19 3
BD19 4
BD19 6
To ensure that the survey was representative of the local area, quotas were set on
age and gender. Data were then weighted to the profile of the area by age,
gender, employment and social grade.
The findings from this survey are accurate to within +/- 5.24 at the 95% confidence
level.
Respondents were asked questions about a range of topics, including:
10






Views of Bradford as a place to live (and change over time)
Awareness of and engagement with local heritage (inc. 10 pre-selected HLFfunded sites/projects in the area)
Satisfaction with local heritage offer
Importance of heritage nationally, locally and personally
Awareness of HLF and support for Lottery funding of heritage
Basic demographics, including frequency of Lottery playing
The survey was conducted using a questionnaire designed by BritainThinks in
collaboration with HLF. A copy of this questionnaire can be found in Appendix
Three.
11
3. Background research

Bradford has a large and diverse population that has grown in size and
become even more diverse in the past twenty years.

Bradford has underperformed economically in the last two decades relative
to the rest of the UK. Its levels of unemployment are high relative to the rest
of the UK and it has become a more deprived place both in absolute and
relative terms.

There has been relatively low Heritage Lottery Fund investment in Bradford
over the last twenty years when compared with the average across the 12
areas included in this study. Local authority and other public sector bodies
have been the primary recipients of funding in the area, with half of HLF
investment in projects relating to museums, libraries, archives and collections.
Life in Bradford1
Bradford is a densely populated urban area and its population has grown in the last
20 years


With 1,428 people per square kilometre in 2011, up from 1,286 in 1994,
Bradford is much more densely populated than the United Kingdom as a
whole, where the average in 2011 was 257 people per square kilometre
(ONS)
The population of Bradford has risen from 471,300 in 1994, to 524,600 in
2012, an increase of 11.3%. This is a slightly higher increase than the British
average for this period (10%) (Nomis/ONS)
Accommodation in Bradford is much cheaper than in the rest of England and Wales,
and prices in Bradford have risen more slowly than those elsewhere


The average house price in Bradford in January 1995 was £55,904,
compared with an average price in England and Wales of £62,235 (Land
Registry)
By November 2013, the average price was £94,402, compared with £165,411
in England and Wales (Land Registry)
Unemployment in Bradford is very high, and has increased significantly over the
past decade. Amongst those in employment, wages are relatively low


Unemployment in Bradford rose from 5.7% in December 2004 to 11% in June
2013. In contrast, national unemployment was at 7.8% in June 2013
(Nomis/ONS)
The proportion of residents claiming Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) was 7.2% in
November 1994, dropped to 2.7% in November 2007 but has since risen
again to 5.2% in November 2013. In November 2013 the proportion of
residents claiming JSA in Britain as a whole was 2.9% (Nomis/ONS)
1
Note: Since most ONS and other data are only broken down to local authority level, the information contained in
the Background section refers to the City of Bradford, the local government district of which Bradford (city) is the
largest settlement.
12



The ratio of total jobs to working age population has fallen since 2000, from
0.75 to 0.66 in 2011; job density is much lower in Bradford than in Britain as
a whole (0.78 in 2011, having remained fairly stable since 2000)
(Nomis/ONS)
The average wage (gross weekly pay for full-time workers) in Bradford has
increased from £341 in 2002 to £446.50 in 2013. In contrast, the 2013
national average was £518.10 and the Yorkshire & The Humber average was
£479.10 (Nomis/ONS)
Although the proportion of residents of Bradford with no qualifications has
improved since 2004, when it was at 20.8%, in 2012 it remained at 15%,
making it very high compared with the national average (9.7%) (Nomis/
ONS)
Bradford has greater levels of deprivation than most areas – and has become a
more deprived area in recent years, in both relative and absolute terms



The average income deprivation rate for the local authority district of
Bradford increased by 0.4%, from 17.9% in 1999 to 18.3% in 2009. In 2009
the average deprivation rate in England was 11.9% (DCLG)
The average employment deprivation rate for the area decreased by 0.3% in
the same period, from 13.8% in 1999 to 13.5% in 2009. The 2009 England
average was 10.2% (DCLG)
Of the 326 local authorities in England, Bradford was the 63rd most
deprived area in 2009, a fall since 1999 when it was the 73rd most deprived
local authority area (DCLG)
Bradford is a highly diverse area – and has become more diverse – with a large
Asian and Muslim community




In 2001, 78.2% of Bradford‟s population described themselves as White - by
2011, only 67.4% of the population did so; by contrast, fully 87.1% of the
population of the whole of the UK as a whole described themselves as White
in 2011 (ONS)
Over the same period, there was an increase in the proportions describing
themselves as Mixed/multiple ethnic group (1.5% to 2.5%), Black (0.9% to
1.8%), Asian (18.9% to 26.8%) and Other (1.3% to 1.5%) (ONS)2
While Christianity remains the largest religion in Bradford (45.9% of the
population identified as Christian in 2011), there has been a sharp decline
since 2001 when 60.1% identified as Christian.
In the same period, the proportion of Muslims increased from 16.1% to
24.7% (compared with the English average of 5%) (ONS)
Bradford has, for the most part, voted Labour over the last 20 years


The Bradford West and Bradford South constituencies returned Labour MPs
from 1992 until 2012, when a by-election in Bradford West returned George
Galloway (Respect Party)
The more rural constituencies of Shipley and Keighley have returned a
mixture of Labour and Conservative MPs since 1992
2
Classificatory systems changed between censuses so figures given are approximations and should be treated as
indicative only.
13

Labour had overall control of the council between 1990-2000, although no
party has had overall control since 2000
Investment in local heritage
There have been reasonably low levels of HLF investment in Bradford‟s heritage in
the last twenty years


HLF has awarded grants worth a total of £26.5m in 90 projects since
1995/96 equivalent to £79.32 per resident3.
The value of grants for projects which had completed at the time of the
research was £23.0m, or £68.71 per capita. This is considerably lower than
the average of £149.70 per capita that has been invested across the 12
locations included in this study4.
The amount invested has not been spread evenly across the twenty years, with the
last ten years seeing less investment than the first ten


Almost £3.5m of grants were awarded in 2006/07, in contrast with a total of
£1.8m that was invested between 2010/11 and 2013/14
The value of individual grants awarded has also varied, ranging from over
£6.1m for the National Museum of Photography, Film and Television, to
£8,000 for the Bradford Lost Ancient Woodland project
Investment has been made in different areas of heritage






£12.9m in museums, libraries, archives and collections
£9.2m in land and biodiversity
£3.2m in historic buildings and monuments
£1.2m in intangible heritage
£88,000 in industrial maritime and transport
£26,800 in community heritage
Grants have been made to a range of applicants, overwhelmingly public sector




£13.1m to other public sector groups
£9.5m to local authority organisations
£2.5m to church organisations or other faith-based groups
£1.3m to community/voluntary organisations
3
HLF figure using all projects that HLF has invested in within the postal towns of Bradford and Shipley, and the
resident population figure within postcode areas corresponding to the 5km-radius area of study
4
Where a reference is made to per capita funding later in this report, this figure for completed projects has been
used, since only these are likely to have had significant benefit for local residents, to date.
14
15
4. HLF’s Bradford stakeholders5

Stakeholders saw Bradford as a city with tremendous potential but felt that
it has underperformed economically in recent decades. They said its centre
has been neglected and is less attractive to locals and visitors than rival cities
in Yorkshire – but they also said that signs of improvement are visible and were
confident the city could exploit its strong cultural and environmental offer.

Stakeholders were clear about the unique importance of heritage to
Bradford, particularly in terms of the historic areas of Saltaire, Little
Germany and textile mills. However, they questioned whether local residents
are particularly engaged with heritage and suspected that it does not play a
prominent role in their everyday lives.

Stakeholders were clear about the importance of heritage to local
communities. It was deemed to make a clear contribution to local pride and
the attitude residents have toward their area; to provide opportunities for
leisure and learning; and to have a significant role to play in generating
economic development in a local area.

HLF was regarded positively by stakeholders: it was seen as an important
source of investment in the area, although some stakeholders thought that
funding could have been more visible. Stakeholders stressed the importance of
HLF investments being directed toward projects with a long-term focus and,
ideally, said that they should be self-sustaining through providing modern uses
for communities.
Views of Bradford
Reflecting the Background Research chapter, stakeholders‟ initial perceptions of
Bradford were of a city that has experienced considerable economic deterioration
over the past twenty years. The traditional, primarily textile, industries that were
once a source of wealth have declined – and the city did not adapt quickly enough.
Furthermore, they felt that the city has been neglected in terms of public
investment, especially compared with other cities in the North such as Liverpool,
Leeds and Manchester. Whereas these cities have rebounded from the decline in
local traditional industries, stakeholders agreed that Bradford has suffered a more
prolonged period of economic stagnation – and that this has bred considerable
negativity and contributed to Bradford‟s reputation as downtrodden.
“Bradford has deteriorated, because we don't have a flexible economy. We have
lost a lot of the industries of the 70s and 80s, although the textile trade is still here
in the form of the carpet business. But we don't have the buoyancy of Leeds or
Sheffield, we haven't had the public money spent here, so Bradford hasn't been
able to decide if it‟s a city or a town in a way.”
(Stakeholder quote)
The city centre – and especially the incompletely developed Westfield Centre – was
regarded by stakeholders as the most visible symbol of economic decline, while the
An overview of the types of stakeholders spoken to can be found in the Methodology: they represent
local organisations from: academia, tourism sector, community/voluntary sector, local government
and business.
5
retail offer was considered inferior to that of Leeds, with an abundance of betting
and loan shops on the high street. Stakeholders perceived stark inequalities
between the city centre, where there is often significant poverty and
unemployment, and wealthier suburbs and villages in the area.
“There‟s definitely issues with unemployment, people on benefits. It seems to be
quite a poor city but the surrounding areas are quite affluent as well. It‟s quite a
strange place because the inner city has quite a lot of issues but then only 10
minutes drive away you're starting to get into the more affluent suburbs and
villages. But there's definitely continuing issues of unemployment benefits and
people just not being able to afford to eat and things like that in the city.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Stakeholders saw Bradford as a highly multicultural area, pointing to repeated
waves of immigration over past decades, a view that was confirmed in the
Background Research chapter. Initially South Asian, more recent immigrant
communities include Africans and Eastern Europeans. Stakeholders themselves
were aware of Bradford‟s reputation as somewhere with high racial and cultural
tensions but thought that this is no longer accurate. They said that whilst there
have been problems in the past, most notably in the 2001 riots, different
communities co-exist peacefully now – although stakeholders stopped short of
claiming that these communities are fully integrated, referring to them as „parallel
communities‟.
“The riots left a legacy of a real lack of confidence between and within
communities and that has really started to change…We've had a couple of English
Defence League demonstrations in Bradford where the English Defence League
believed they could come and start a riot in Bradford and they came here with the
intention of making the city burn. And Bradfordians responded fantastically and
just came together and resisted in a calm and peaceful way. Following the Mark
Duggan shooting in Tottenham in 2011 when I know there was a lot of trouble in
other British cities, there wasn't a stone thrown in Bradford. They are just a couple
of examples of how people are more confident in their communities.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Despite painting quite a negative picture of Bradford‟s recent history, stakeholders
did agree that the city has considerable potential for regeneration and reinvention.
They pointed to a wonderful surrounding countryside, beautiful Victorian
architecture, a wide heritage offer (see below) and rich cultural diversity. Some
stakeholders had also begun to notice initial signs of improvement in the area, with
a high rate of start-up companies (particularly in the technology sector) and
investment in the physical infrastructure of the city centre, such as community
buildings and a park. They even expected the Westfield Centre itself to be
completed in 2015.
“It's a city that‟s on the move. It's still got a hell of a lot to do but I think it‟s a
really exciting time for Bradford.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Bradford’s heritage
Stakeholders displayed high levels of awareness of Bradford‟s heritage and agreed
that heritage is particularly important to the area. The most prominent heritage
sites were the historic districts of Saltaire and Little Germany but stakeholders also
18
referenced the Victorian architecture in the city centre, the city‟s literary and
media history, and the diverse cultural heritage resulting from the large immigrant
communities in the area.
“Heritage is extremely important to Bradford, it has a very rich heritage especially
compared to other parts of West Yorkshire. It has wonderful architecture, rich
literary heritage, great food, lots of different cultures. I don't think we exploit it
enough to be honest. There's always a rivalry between Bradford and Leeds and
Leeds is always seen to win, it's a big commercial and retail centre. But I think
Bradford has the culture. The heritage and the arts, it's one of the best offers in
the area.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“I think that the heritage is really complex, very deep and engrained in the culture
of the place and is one of the, if not the greatest, asset in setting out Bradford's
road to a uniqueness and distinctiveness as a place…Nearly 6000 listed buildings
means that the regeneration of the city cannot ignore the heritage of those
buildings and preserving the heritage of those buildings is absolutely central to the
success of the future of the city.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Despite this uniquely important heritage, stakeholders did not think that all
residents of Bradford are equally appreciative of and engaged with it. They said
that local heritage does not play a large role in local residents‟ everyday lives – but
that it might make a subconscious impact on local residents and that residents
would be highly protective if it were ever threatened.
“I don't think they value it, I don‟t think that they appreciate what there is here.
Just in Bradford alone we've got two theatres, both over 100 years old, and like I
say we've got the galleries, the museums and they're all free, and they're all
different as well. I just don't think they value what sort of heritage the city has for
them. I think that people from outside the area do but I don't think that it's at the
forefront of what people think locally. I think heritage to most people is old
buildings, museums and things like that; they don't look at the wider picture of it.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“I think it depends on who you talk to. Most people probably don't think about it
very much; they're too busy living their lives. But they will notice it subconsciously
- you can't avoid it, it's all around you.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Heritage’s role in society
Stakeholders were in firm agreement about the role that heritage plays locally in
Bradford and more widely in society.
Stakeholders said that one of the most important contributions that heritage makes
to local communities is a sense of pride and positivity toward the area as a place to
live. This was deemed to be of particular importance in an area like Bradford,
which has suffered economically. Stakeholders were clear about the importance of
the built environment to how people feel about where they live.
19
“The public recognise the investment, it makes them feel like they and their area
aren‟t being as overlooked…The physical environment is key to the confidence of a
city.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“One of the main benefits in deprived areas, like Bradford, is the contribution it
makes to local pride. That‟s especially important in an area that isn‟t a honeypot,
that doesn‟t attract tourists.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Another benefit heritage brings to local people identified by stakeholders is the
development of cultural and entertainment opportunities: having something to do
in their leisure time. This was felt to be particularly important in deprived areas
like Bradford which have an otherwise limited entertainment and activity offer.
Furthermore, it was seen to be particularly beneficial as a form of leisure activity
because it is educational and brings residents closer to their area‟s history.
“The opportunity to be able to visit galleries, parks, etc [is the biggest benefit].
Most of them are free of charge and accessible and I think that opportunity is really
important for residents to be able to do. I think that if they do start to value it
then that will have an impact on the general wellbeing of them I think because
once you know what's on your doorstep and available for you it can improve your
lifestyle.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“I think its about re-engaging people with culture, with their heritage, creating
opportunities - particularly in terms of the historic parks - for recreation, creating
opportunities to meet lots of people and thus dealing with social deprivation.”
(Stakeholder quote)
The third clear benefit of heritage identified by all stakeholders was its capacity to
act as a catalyst for economic regeneration. It can attract footfall to different
areas, both in terms of local residents and tourists. It can also, as it has done in
Ilkley and the Saltaire area, attract businesses to the area.
“Economically for us it‟s black and white. If we can save our heritage and develop
it and promote it then we will get more people visiting the city and spending
money in the city. Also people might see it as an investment opportunity to work
somewhere like this as well.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“It makes the area a more attractive place to live and, ultimately, can also be a
marketing tool for Bradford, to attract people to the area. That can be tourists but
also businesses. Bradford has a great business offer, cheap business units and good
transport, it just needs people to know about it.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Attitudes toward HLF
Stakeholders in Bradford have mixed awareness and understanding of HLF as an
organisation. Some were very familiar with the processes and people involved in
funding applications, while others knew little more than that it exists.
20
“The team in Yorkshire is a very good team. It‟s a small team but they are really
good at building relationships and providing clarity about the things that they can
and cannot do and very good at advice… They contribute to restoring and
enhancing heritage. They have a real passion for it. They advise, they provide
expertise on occasions; they challenge us to do things differently. They really are
custodians of heritage in a way.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“I know that it exists but I don‟t know very much more than that.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Stakeholders were broadly positive about HLF and thought that it has made a real
difference in Bradford and been a source of investment at a time when other
sources subsided. Most stakeholders could point to examples of visible, successful
funding for local heritage that had made a real impact but – perhaps reflecting the
below-average per capita HLF investment in Bradford – disagreed as to how
widespread and extensive funding has been in the area.
“The HLF is the part of Lottery funding that I think really stands out. It consistently
makes a difference and if people stopped to think about its impact they'd be
shocked and delighted by the impact it‟s had over the years in a place like
Bradford.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“It‟s changed people's perceptions about their place, their environment, about the
projects that have benefitted. 2.8 million people visit Robert's Park at Saltaire and
that's phenomenal and actually lots of different businesses have cropped up from
that.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“You have to know about funding to know it's happened, it's not particularly
visible. The funding has been very beneficial for those projects that have received
it, but they tend to be quite isolated. I don't know what the agenda is for funding.
One clear example of successful funding has been the Salt Mill site, which is now a
thriving building with modern use and has made the surrounding area trendier,
there's a little Silicon Valley happening in nearby Shipley as a result, businesses
want to move in.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Irrespective of whether they were familiar with HLF or not, stakeholders did all
have a view of what good use of Lottery money for heritage would be. The primary
requirement, agreed on unanimously by stakeholders, was a long-term focus. As
well as having some form of lasting, permanent presence, a successful heritage site
or project should be designed to be sustainable, either through continued external
funding or through community participation.
“You need to motivate people to continue the story after the project finishes, to
continue the education process. As the funder, the investment can't just be a oneoff either, you need to stick around and keep investing in the long-term. I think
that you have to have something physical come out of the project at the end of it
too.”
(Stakeholder quote)
21
One suggested way of encouraging community participation and long-term viability
was by adapting heritage sites so that they have modern uses. Another was by
ensuring a balance of funding streams so that it is not solely dependent on HLFfunding and can outlast it.
“There's potential to do a lot more, especially by engaging and involving
communities in the projects. There are a lot of historic buildings which could do
with refurbishing/renovating but it's important to put these buildings to use, it's
pointless to just give them a facelift, they need to be living, breathing buildings.
They can compensate for council funding cuts for community outreach
programmes.”
(Stakeholder quote)
“It has to lever in other funding that enables it to maximise its benefit because if
its 100% funded then, quite frankly, when that funding runs out then projects like
that die and it doesn't leave the sort of legacy that we want.”
(Stakeholder quote)
Other stakeholder suggestions for increasing the impact of investment of Lottery
money in local heritage included better geographical targeting of investment, so
that it either goes to areas that are less affluent or areas that have such potential
for a heritage offer that real momentum could be generated through the
investment. One stakeholder suggested that HLF could further its impact for small,
community-based projects by accepting that not all applicants will have the same
means or be equally professional.
“I want HLF to be less stringent and be prepared to accept lower quality bids - or
raise the capacity of applicants by better helping them to prepare. It's difficult to
complete applications if you are a smaller, less professional outfit - HLF can't
expect everyone to be professional entrepreneurs. The best thing they can do is to
be a critical friend.”
(Stakeholder quote)
22
5. Local residents of Bradford

Local residents saw Bradford as a place that has suffered serious decline in
recent decades. While residents valued and felt proud of some aspects of the
city, such as the surrounding landscape, historic buildings and cultural
diversity, and thought that its reputation for community disharmony was
exaggerated, they felt it has deteriorated considerably as the local economy
had stalled. Locals felt the city looks neglected, with a poor retail offer and
high unemployment.

Awareness of local heritage is high, although it varies from project to
project and local residents generally underestimate the full range of
heritage sites and projects in the area. Engagement with local heritage is also
high, although it depends on life stage and family circumstances.

Overall, local residents believe that Bradford’s heritage has improved over
time, though to a lesser extent than residents of other locations featured in
this study. There is a desire for more visible investment to be made and for
existing heritage sites and projects to be promoted and publicised more widely.

Bradford’s BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) residents are more
positive about the city (especially how it has changed in recent decades)
and more likely to have noticed an impact on their quality of life as a result
of local heritage sites and projects.

Heritage is widely seen as important by Bradford’s local residents: important
for the country, for the local area, and for them personally. Heritage was
deemed particularly important for an area like Bradford because of its ability
to foster pride where it is in short supply and because many heritage sites and
projects make the area a more attractive place to live, as well as potentially
generating much-needed economic growth.

Local residents have little awareness or understanding of how Lottery
funding of heritage sites and projects works - in general or in Bradford;
nevertheless, they are broadly positive about Lottery funding of heritage.
However, in light of the perceived benefits of heritage funding – and because of
a sense that Bradford has been somewhat neglected and that there are few
visible signs of investment – residents were desirous of more funding for
heritage in the area.

Local residents thought that being accessible to locals, (both in terms of
affordability and in terms of not being exclusively targeted at certain
audiences), and being well-publicised are two requirements for a successful
local heritage project. Being economically beneficial, (by creating jobs directly
or by attracting tourists or businesses), is a requirement for a successful large
local project, while a successful small local project should strengthen
community spirit and ideally create new skills in the community.
23
Views of Bradford
Local residents of Bradford have mixed views about their city. The quantitative
survey revealed that, while 58% of locals believe it is a good place to live, 27%
disagree.
% of local residents agreeing that Bradford and
the surrounding area is a good place to live
14%
27%
13%
Agree strongly
Agree slightly
Neither
14%
Disagree slightly
31%
Disagree strongly
Q2. How much do you agree or disagree that Bradford is a good place to live? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
Compared with the other 11 locations featured as part of this study, residents of
Bradford are least likely to agree that their local area is a good place to live. The
average proportion of residents across all 12 locations agreeing that their local
area is a good place to live is 85%, with 56% strongly agreeing (compared with only
27% in Bradford).
Positivity is higher amongst BAME residents; 78% of this group agree that Bradford
is a good place to live, compared with just 50% of White residents.
A number of factors driving positivity emerged from the workshop. Participants
were asked to work as two groups to determine the five best things about Bradford
– below is one group‟s response to the exercise:





Food
Fashion
Close to countryside, lakes, coast
Cultural diversity
The people
(The 5 best things about living in Bradford according to workshop participants)
Participants often referred favourably to the city‟s location in the workshop,
providing access to the coast, surrounding countryside (e.g. lakes) and historic
towns like Skipton.
A second perceived advantage was the local culinary offer, which was felt to be
both cheap and diverse. Workshop participants said that they can get any type of
food imaginable and that there are a number of culinary gems hidden around the
area.
24
A third driver of positivity toward the area as a place to live was the cultural
diversity. Participants spoke favourably about the mix of communities, fashions
and cultures in the area – and believed that Bradford‟s reputation as a „racist city‟
is no longer deserved.
Positively for HLF, heritage appears to be one of the primary drivers of positivity
toward Bradford for local residents. In the workshop, many of the positive
attributes of Bradford, such as the architecture, theatre, food and improved parks,
could be considered aspects of the city‟s heritage offer. Furthermore, the
quantitative data suggests that those who say they know a little or a lot about the
local heritage (59%) are more likely than those who say they know very little or
nothing (52%) to agree that Bradford is a good place to live6.
However, workshop participants were also quick to point out the disadvantages of
living in Bradford. Participants also worked together to develop a list of the five
worst things about living in Bradford:





No jobs, don‟t make things anymore
Shopping
Pubs closing
Litter
Crime
(The five worst things about living in Bradford, according to workshop
participants)
The retail offer was heavily criticised, with participants consistently criticising the
lifeless high-street, especially when compared with rival towns and cities in
Yorkshire (most notably Leeds). Echoing stakeholders‟ perceptions, the unfinished
Westfield shopping centre was the most easily-referenced symbol of this malaise,
while participants also noted that local pubs are closing down at a fast rate.
“There‟s no commerce, no vibe, nothing going on.”
(Workshop participant quote)
“There‟s no diversity in terms of shops. It‟s all pawn shops, loan shops, pound
shops and the like. There‟s so much more going on in Leeds, so much more
shopping.”
(Workshop participant quote)
A second significant criticism of life in Bradford was the anaemic local labour
market. Reflecting the findings outlined in the Background Research and
stakeholder chapters, workshop participants bemoaned the decline of traditional
manufacturing industries in the area – as well as the fact that not enough jobs have
been created to replace those that have been lost.
“We don‟t make things here anymore. We used to have a big manufacturing
industry in the area. There‟s no career development here anymore, people go to
Leeds looking for jobs.”
(Workshop participant quote)
6
Small base sizes mean that this difference is not statistically significant and should be treated as indicative only.
25
Other criticisms of local life raised by workshop participants were high crime rates
and the increasingly unaffordable cost of car insurance. Workshop participants also
said that the city centre looks neglected, with a significant litter problem – while a
number of participants were critical of the smell in the centre (blaming a number
of factories and plants).
One of the clearest findings to emerge from the workshop, reflecting the
Background Research and local stakeholders‟ perceptions, was that Bradford is a
place that has markedly declined in recent decades; even whilst criticising it as a
place to live, participants were clear that it had been better in the past. They
argued that it had once been an industrial powerhouse and, importantly,
considered more affluent and attractive than nearby Leeds.
“Bradford used to be better than Leeds – I can‟t believe that now.”
(Workshop participant quote)
This historical account could perhaps explain some of the resilient pride in the area
that workshop participants expressed, whilst simultaneously feeling a sense of
embarrassment at the way that the city had declined.
“When you go on holiday and someone asks you where you come from, you don‟t
want to say you‟re from Bradford.”
(Workshop participant quote)
Workshop participants‟ perception of local decline is strongly supported by the
quantitative data, with 56% of local residents believing Bradford has deteriorated
over their time of residence (and 33% believing it to be much worse now than when
they first lived there). Only 18% of local residents believe the area has improved.
% of local residents viewing Bradford as a better/worse place to live over
time of residence
Much better now
A little better now
9%
10%
26%
About the same
A little worse now
Much worse now
23%
33%
Q3. Over the time that you have lived in the area, has Bradford got better or worse as a place to live? [Base: 350 adult
residents of Bradford]
This perception compares very unfavourably with the average across all twelve
locations featured as part of this study, where only 26% perceive a deterioration in
their area as a place to live (and 10% believe it to be much worse). On balance,
residents across all twelve locations are more likely to believe that their area has
improved (42%). Bradford‟s residents are the most likely to believe their area has
deteriorated and it is one of only two locations where residents are more likely to
believe their area has deteriorated than believe it has improved (Peterborough
being the other).
26
As mentioned above, one of the few perceived improvements in the area that
workshop participants identified was the improvement in inter-community
relations. Participants were keenly aware of Bradford‟s negative reputation in the
rest of the UK, especially as a result of the high-profile race riots in 2001, but
claimed that relations between communities have made significant progress and
that the cultural diversity on offer in the city is now one of its strong points.
There is a suggestion in both strands of the research, however, that, White
residents of Bradford have some reservations about this change. The quantitative
survey shows that while 42% of BAME Bradford residents believe the area has
deteriorated over their time of residence, 62% of White residents do. Despite
feeling positive about the improved cultural relations and welcoming much of the
cultural diversity in the city, some White workshop participants also expressed
concerns about the pace of change, and that not enough was being done to
preserve the city‟s pre-immigration culture and tradition.
Bradford’s heritage
Residents of Bradford say that they know a lot about the local area‟s heritage,
especially when compared with residents of the other eleven locations featured as
part of this study. Forty-two per cent of Bradford‟s residents say they know „a lot‟
about the area‟s heritage, whereas the average across all twelve locations is 34%.
Only 11% of Bradford‟s residents say they know very little, and just 1% say they
know nothing.
% of local residents saying they know about Bradford’s heritage
42%
A lot
46%
A little
11%
Very little
Nothing
1%
Q5. Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage, how much would you say you know about it? [Base: 350 adult residents of
Bradford]
This was reflected in the workshop, where participants demonstrated a reasonably
broad understanding of what constitutes local heritage. The word-cloud below is
drawn from participants‟ responses to an exercise at the beginning of the workshop
that required them to list all of the things that occurred to them when they
thought of heritage in the area:
27
When I think of heritage in Bradford I think of…
(Workshop participants‟ top-of-mind perceptions of Bradford‟s heritage)
While there was an initial focus on the physical infrastructure of the city
(particularly around mills and museums), workshop participants expanded on this in
ensuing discussion to include not just the infrastructure of industry, but also the
stories and memories associated with it; many participants saw childhood
memories or playing on bails of wool, or family stories about working in the mills as
part of their heritage.
Moving away from industry, participants also included the local dialect in their
definition of heritage, because they felt it is something unique to Bradford, as well
as the local transport system, sports clubs and famous Bradfordians such as David
Hockney.
“It is about the physical spaces but it‟s also about things like the language,
different ways of doing things. I‟ve been trying to find a book of Yorkshire sayings
and books written in what you might call the traditional Yorkshire dialect, but it‟s
very difficult to find these days.”
(Workshop participant quote)
More so than in the five other workshops featured in this study, there was a
strongly personal and familial conception of heritage in Bradford, especially among
British Asian participants. One participant equated local heritage with her own
family history, and there was a prominent role for family stories about immigrating
and settling in Bradford, and what life had been like in their family‟s country of
origin in the discussions.
Despite the high overall levels of awareness, with 88% of local residents saying they
know a little or a lot about local heritage, levels of awareness are more varied
when focused on specific heritage sites or projects in the area. Respondents were
shown a list of 10 projects, selected to represent a diverse range of projects that
HLF has funded in the area. Whilst 97% of local residents are aware of the National
Media Museum and 95% are aware of Lister Park, only 39% of residents are aware of
historic building restoration work undertaken in the Manningham area.
28
% awareness of selected local heritage sites and projects
National Media Museum
97%
3%
Lister Park
95%
5%
Bradford Industrial Museum
91%
9%
Cartwright Hall Art Gallery
89%
11%
Bradford Bulls/Odsall Stadium Rugby League
Archive
85%
78%
Saltaire World Heritage Site
Historic building restoration work in Bradford City
Centre
Historic building restoration work in the
Manningham area
22%
63%
Heaton Woods
South Pennine Moors
15%
37%
58%
45%
41%
55%
39%
60%
Aware
Unaware
Q8. I am going to read you a list of heritage sites and projects in Bradford. For each one, please tell me if you are aware
of it and, if so, whether or not you have visited or taken part. [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
This reflects the general trend across all 12 locations, where major
attractions/museums and parks command the highest levels of awareness, while
townscape regeneration and temporary heritage activities are least well known.
Beyond general awareness, which was relatively high, levels of actual participation
with local heritage sites and projects are more varied – both in terms of the type of
project and the nature of the participation.
Firstly, and consistently with the findings from the research across all 12 locations,
major museums and parks in Bradford are the most widely visited heritage
attractions by local residents. Respondents in the quantitative survey were again
presented with ten local heritage sites and projects, selected to represent a
diverse range, and asked which of them they had ever visited.
29
% engagement with selected local heritage sites and projects
87%
Lister Park
84%
National Media Museum
74%
Bradford Industrial Museum
70%
Cartwright Hall Art Gallery
Bradford Bulls/Odsall Stadium Rugby League
Archive
53%
51%
Saltaire World Heritage Site
40%
Heaton Woods
Historic building restoration work in Bradford City
Centre
South Pennine Moors
Historic building restoration work in the
Manningham area
30%
26%
17%
Visited/participated
Q8. I am going to read you a list of heritage sites and projects in Bradford. For each one, please tell me if you are aware
of it and, if so, whether or not you have visited or taken part. [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
As can be seen in the chart above, the two most widely visited sites are Lister Park
and the National Media Museum (which 87% and 84% of local residents had visited,
respectively), followed by the Bradford Industrial Museum and Cartwright Hall Art
Gallery. By contrast, only a small minority of local residents have engaged with the
historic building restoration work in Bradford City centre and the Manningham
area.
Secondly, despite workshop participants being positive about the opportunity
offered by local heritage sites and projects, it was clear from the workshop that
they saw them as something that they would tend to visit only under certain
circumstances. One of these was when showing visitors, such as friends or
relatives, around the area, another was a family day out.
“My kids love going to the Boleyn Hall, they find it so entertaining. They learn from
it as well, more than they would if they were reading a book.”
(Workshop participant quote)
On the whole, residents of Bradford are satisfied with their local heritage offer.
The quantitative data indicates that 68% of local residents are either very or fairly
satisfied with what Bradford and the surrounding area has to offer in terms of
heritage sites and projects. Only 12% describe themselves as dissatisfied.
30
% of local residents satisfied with local heritage sites and projects to visit
or be involved with
7%
5%
16%
Very satisfied
19%
Fairly satisfied
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
Fairly dissatisfied
52%
Very dissatisfied
Q7. Thinking generally about what Bradford and the surrounding area has to offer in terms of heritage sites and projects to
visit or get involved with, overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied would you say you are? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
Nevertheless, the generally high level of satisfaction with Bradford‟s heritage offer
is slightly below the average level of satisfaction across the twelve locations
featured as part of this study, where 25% of residents describe themselves as very
satisfied and 53% as fairly satisfied with their local heritage offer.
The generally high overall satisfaction with Bradford‟s heritage is reflected in
individual measures of satisfaction, too. As shown in the chart below, the
quantitative findings indicate that 83% of local residents who have ever visited a
local heritage site or project enjoyed their visit (with 49% strongly agreeing).
% of local visitors to heritage sites or projects agreeing
I enjoyed visiting or taking part in
these heritage sites and projects
49%
Agree strongly
34%
Agree slightly
Q9. Thinking about your experiences with these heritage sites and projects in Bradford, to what extent do you agree or
disagree with the following statements? [Base: 347 adult residents of Bradford who have visited a local heritage site or
project]
Further, on a separate measure of satisfaction with local heritage, 72% of local
residents who have visited at least one of the selected sites agree that Bradford‟s
heritage sites and projects are well-maintained.
% of local visitors to heritage sites or projects agreeing
Bradford's heritage sites and
projects are well-maintained
29%
Agree strongly
43%
Agree slightly
Q9. Thinking about your experiences with these heritage sites and projects in Bradford, to what extent do you agree or
disagree with the following statements? [Base: 347 adult residents of Bradford who have visited a local heritage site or
project]
31
Similarly, 82% of local visitors would recommend that other people visit Bradford to
experience its heritage sites and projects. This is a particularly significant finding
when set in the context of workshop participants‟ sense of embarrassment at
Bradford‟s negative reputation, and suggests that Bradford‟s strong heritage offer
might be a way of overcoming those perceptions.
% of local visitors to heritage sites or projects agreeing
I would recommend that other
people come to Bradford to
experience its heritage sites and
projects
52%
Agree strongly
30%
Agree slightly
Q9. Thinking about your experiences with these heritage sites and projects in Bradford, to what extent do you agree or
disagree with the following statements? [Base: 347 adult residents of Bradford who have visited a local heritage site or
project]
The discussions in the workshop offered some explanation for this slightly lower
level of satisfaction and opportunities to improve overall satisfaction among local
residents. These criticisms did not focus on the quality or diversity of the sites and
projects themselves, but rather in the way they are presented and accessed. One
criticism voiced by participants was that not enough is done to bring heritage
attractions to the attention of local residents and that more could be done in
terms of advertising, particularly on social media.
“There‟s plenty for people to do if you look for it. But you really have to go looking
for it, the information just isn‟t there for people.”
(Workshop participant quote)
Workshop participants also felt that the heritage offer could be „knitted together‟
more effectively. For example, in order to keep the sites and projects relevant and
interesting to locals, participants thought that there could be more one-off events
and temporary exhibits. There was also criticism of the way that the different
heritage sites and projects are dispersed around the place, unlike somewhere like
York where they are concentrated in one area and, consequently, easier to access
and visit in a single sitting.
Heritage funding over time in Bradford
Both strands of the research suggest that local residents tend to think that
Bradford‟s heritage has improved over their time of residence. As shown in the
chart below, 48% of local residents believe that Bradford‟s heritage sites and
projects are better now than when they first lived in the area. Thirty-four per cent
of residents believe they are about the same, while only 15% think that the area‟s
heritage sites and projects have deteriorated.
32
% of local residents viewing Bradford’s heritage as having
improved/deteriorated over time of residence
22%
Much better now
26%
A little better now
34%
About the same
A little worse now
Much worse now
8%
7%
Q10. Thinking heritage sites and projects in Bradford over the time you’ve lived in the area, would you say they are… ?
[Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
Workshop participants were particularly aware of the improvement in the city‟s
parks and green spaces. Whereas they had previously been seen as the most
dangerous parts of the city, they have been regenerated to the extent that they
are now one of the city‟s main selling points and are used frequently by the city‟s
residents (including children and families).
“Roberts Park was on the way to college for me and I used to go the long way
round it just to avoid having to walk through it. It used to be full of all sorts of
things and was really dangerous. But it‟s completely different now, you see
families and old people using it all the time now.”
(Workshop participant)
Although the general perception among local residents is clearly that Bradford‟s
heritage has improved, this sense of improvement is, however, less widespread
than in the other local areas featured as part of this study. Across all twelve
locations, 64% of local residents think that the heritage in their local area is better
now, while 29% think it is about the same and only 5% think it has deteriorated.
It is possible that, as referenced in the Background Research chapter, this is due to
the relatively low per capita HLF investment in Bradford compared with the other
locations featured as part of this study; although they were not talking specifically
about heritage, workshop participants felt that Bradford has in general been
overlooked and receives less attention than other places in the UK. This was
particularly relevant to the neglected city centre and unfinished Westfield Centre –
but there was a wider sense in which participants felt that Bradford has not
received sufficient investment in recent decades and that important local heritage
is being lost.
This also reflects the perception of some stakeholders that investment in
Bradford‟s heritage has not been particularly visible.
Portions of local heritage are being eroded. A lot has been
destroyed, like the Kirkgate Centre or Swan Arcade, with rubbish
being put in its place. I personally feel a sense of loss and missed
opportunity, especially with a waste of money on other projects.
(Excerpt from workshop participant's response to „think/feel‟ written exercise)
33
The importance of heritage overall
Echoing the view of stakeholders, residents of Bradford strongly believe that
heritage is important. As illustrated in the chart below, residents believe heritage
to be important for the country as a whole, for their local area and for them
personally.
% of local residents describing importance of heritage to
them, their local area and country as a whole
45%
Heritage is very
important
45%
68%
Heritage is fairly
important
37%
39%
23%
17%
14%
For me personally
For my local area
8%
Heritage is not
very/not at all
important
For the country
Q6. Overall, how important is heritage for you personally/for your local area/for the country? [Base: 350 adult residents of
Bradford]
National importance
The quantitative findings indicate that 91% of Bradford‟s residents believe heritage
is fairly or very important for the country as a whole, with 68% saying it is very
important.
Participants‟ responses to the obituary exercise, where they were asked to imagine
all Bradford‟s heritage had died and to write an obituary for it, reflect this strong
sense of national importance. In the ensuing discussions, participants talked about
the country needing heritage to learn from the past and so that its people know
where it comes from. Participants also stressed the importance of heritage as a
determinant of both local and national identity.
Local importance
This research also shows that residents of Bradford believe that heritage is
important for their local area. The quantitative survey shows that 84% of local
residents believe heritage is fairly or very important for the Bradford area,
outnumbering those residents who think it is not very or not at all important (14%)
by around six to one.
There are several reasons why residents of Bradford think that heritage matters for
their local area. At the end of the workshop, participants completed a
questionnaire which asked what they thought the single main benefit of local
heritage investment was. Some of the responses are illustrated below.
34
Entertainment for
people
Local people having
pride and making
Bradford attractive
to business and
investment
It is good for the
people of Bradford
and for tourists
Building and maintaining a
community spirit
Attract tourism and create a
sense of pride in my city
To keep awareness of
Bradford’s past history in the
minds and hearts of the people
Education and
entertainment
To protect things for the
future and to restore and
maintain places of interest
Improvement in the area
For community spirit and
pride in your local area
For the education and
well-being of our
children, the next
generation
Improving the area,
helping people by
making it a better
place and keeping a
part of Bradford
The main benefit of investment in local heritage is…
(Main benefits of local heritage investment according to workshop participants)
A primary reason for heritage‟s importance is simply that it makes Bradford a
better place to live. As illustrated in the questionnaire responses and confirmed in
the chart below, local residents believe that Bradford‟s heritage sites and projects
have improved the area, with 28% agreeing and a further 37% strongly agreeing
that they have made it a better place to live.
% of local residents agreeing
Bradford's heritage sites and
projects make it a better place to
live
37%
Agree strongly
28%
Agree slightly
Q11. Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage sites and projects, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
A more specific reason for heritage‟s local importance is its ability to foster pride
in the area. Seventy per cent of residents say that Bradford‟s heritage sites and
projects make them feel proud of their local area. Bradford‟s BAME residents are
particularly likely to feel proud of the local area as a result of its heritage sites and
projects, with 81% agreeing (compared to 65% of White residents).
% of local residents agreeing
Bradford's heritage sites and
projects make me feel proud of my
local area
39%
Agree strongly
31%
Agree slightly
Q11. Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage sites and projects, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
35
“It makes you proud to be from somewhere that has something different, some
identity. Without it, you‟d be in just any place.”
(Workshop participant quote)
The workshop confirmed the importance of heritage‟s contribution to local pride,
particularly in an area like Bradford where local pride was thought to have been in
short supply in recent decades. Workshop participants believed that Bradford has a
strongly negative reputation externally and valued the role that heritage could play
in restoring positivity toward the area.
“We came through a difficult period. There was a wave of negativity because of
the riots, the economy and the crime here. Heritage stopped Bradford going under,
I think.”
(Workshop participant quote)

The newspaper headline would read „SHAME!‟ We have lost all
our heritage!‟ Bradford would look like a dump. We have
already lost many of the buildings which have been
demolished and only few of them survive, it seems like we‟re
losing everything. Bradfordians will be disheartened and
Bradford would not get any more visitors.
(Excerpt from workshop participants‟ response to obituary exercise)
The word-cloud below is drawn from the second part of an exercise at the
beginning of the workshop, which required participants to describe how they felt
when they thought about heritage in the area, and illustrates the positivity and
pride that heritage generates in local residents:
When I think of heritage in Bradford I feel…
(Workshop participants‟ feelings toward Bradford‟s heritage)
“If something looks crap, people won‟t respect it. If you make the area look nice,
it will change people‟s attitudes and they will have pride in the area.”
Workshop participant quote
36
Another reason why residents believe heritage to be important for their area is in
its ability to boost the local economy, by attracting businesses and tourists. As
demonstrated below, around three-quarters (76%) of local residents agree that
Bradford‟s heritage sites and projects make it a place that other people are likely
to visit.
% of local residents agreeing
Bradford's heritage sites and
projects make it a place that o ther
people are likely to visit
41%
Agree strongly
35%
Agree slightly
Q11. Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage sites and projects, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
In the workshop, too, participants stressed the importance of heritage in attracting
people to the area and referenced attractions such as Saltaire World Heritage Site
and the National Media Museum as being particularly successful in attracting
tourists, both from elsewhere in the UK and abroad.
Personal importance
The quantitative survey shows that 82% of Bradford‟s residents feel that heritage is
important to them personally, with just under half (45%) believing it to be very
important. This was reflected in the workshop, where participants stressed strong
attachment to the area‟s heritage – even if they were infrequent visitors to
heritage sites.
One measure of the personal importance of heritage to local residents of Bradford
is the impact it has on their quality of life. Ninety per cent of local residents aware
of any of the ten selected heritage sites and projects7 say that they have an impact
on their quality of life as a result of the area‟s heritage, while around a quarter
(24%) say local heritage has a large impact on their personal quality (rating the
impact as 8/10 or higher). Only 10% say that there is no impact on their quality of
life.
7
349 of the 350 local residents surveyed were aware of at least one of the ten selected sites and
projects which suggests that the figure for all local residents would be equally high.
37
% of aware local residents perceiving an impact on their
quality of life from Bradford’s heritage sites/projects
19%
18%
15%
11%
10%
6%
1%
0
No
impact
1
8%
3%
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
5%
5%
9
10
Very
large
impact
Q13. Thinking about all of the heritage sites and projects that you know about in Bradford together, please rate the impact
that they have on your personal quality of life in Bradford? [Base: 349 adult residents of Bradford aware of any local heritage]
Interestingly, the perceived impact of local heritage sites and projects on quality
of life is greater for BAME local residents than White residents. Thirty-six per cent
of BAME residents rate the impact on their quality of life as eight to ten, compared
with 18% of White residents; by contrast, 23% of White residents rate the impact as
between 0 and 3, compared with 12% of BAME residents.
While, in absolute terms, these figures clearly demonstrate the positive impact
that heritage has on the lives of the residents of Bradford, they compare slightly
unfavourably with the other 11 locations featured as part of this study. Across all
twelve locations, an average of 29% of residents perceive a large (8-10) impact on
their personal quality of life; in certain locations, such as Glasgow where 37% of
local residents perceive a large impact, the proportions are much higher.
As in the other locations featured as part of this study, different types of heritage
site and project in Bradford impact on local residents‟ lives to different extents. Of
the ten selected sites and projects that survey respondents were asked to
evaluate, those that improve the quality of life of the highest proportion of
Bradford‟s residents are the historic building restoration work in Bradford City
Centre (58% of local residents saying much or a little better quality of life as a
result), Saltaire World Heritage Site (56%) and Lister Park (55%).
38
The projects with the most widespread positive impact on local residents‟ quality
of life are large and high-profile. Furthermore, as in the other 11 locations
featured as part of this study, a park and major museum/attraction have a very
widespread impact. This was reflected in the workshop, where participants often
referred to Saltaire World Heritage Site as being particularly important for drawing
in tourists to the area, improving the local economy and making residents better
off, as well as often going to Lister Park to enjoy it for themselves. Finally, the
historic building restoration work in Bradford City Centre was felt to be particularly
important for local quality of life because of the perceived unattractiveness of the
centre and the sense that investment in the centre had been lacking.
Local residents also valued local heritage on an individual level because of the
educational benefits it provides. As demonstrated below, 77% of those who have
visited a local heritage site or project8 agree that doing so helped them understand
more about the history of Bradford, while 67% agree that it helped them have a
better understanding of other people‟s cultures. BAME residents of Bradford are
especially likely to agree with this latter point: 86% say that they have gained a
better understanding of other people‟s cultures as a result of visiting Bradford‟s
heritage sites and projects, compared with 59% of White residents.
8
Again, 347 out of 350 local residents surveyed had visited or taken part in at least one selected
heritage site or project, which suggests that the total figure for all residents of Bradford would be
similarly high.
39
% of local visitors to heritage sites or projects agreeing
Visiting or taking part in these heritage sites
or projects has helped me understand more
about the history of Bradford
45%
Visiting or taking part in these heritage sites
and projects has made me have a better
understanding of other people's cultures
34%
Agree strongly
32%
33%
Agree slightly
Q9. Thinking about your experiences with these heritage sites and projects in Bradford, to what extent do you agree or
disagree with the following statements? [Base: 347 adult residents of Bradford who have visited a local heritage site or
project]
A final reason why Bradford‟s residents deemed heritage to be important to them
personally is the part it plays in shaping their own sense of identity. The
quantitative survey suggests that a majority (56%) of local residents believe that
Bradford‟s heritage sites and projects are important for their sense of personal
identity.
% of local residents agreeing
Bradford's heritage sites and
projects are important for my
personal sense of identity
28%
Agree strongly
28%
Agree slightly
Q11. Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage sites and projects, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
For the pre-task exercise, which required participants to bring along an object or
photograph that represented local heritage, one participant brought along a photo
that he had seen hanging in a local pub. It was of two textile workers and was
several decades old. The participant said that he recognised one of the workers as
his own father and told stories of how he had childhood memories of playing on
bails of wool where his father worked. He said that the city‟s industrial heritage
was part of his own identity.
(Case study: Local heritage and a resident‟s sense of personal identity)
Bradford‟s heritage sites and projects are particularly likely to be important for
older residents‟ personal sense of identity. Sixty-three per cent of those aged 35 or
over say local heritage is important for their identity, compared with 41% of those
aged under 35. Workshop participants suggested that attachment to heritage in the
area strengthens with age.
“If you‟ve not lived your life, you‟ve got less to look back on and heritage is less
important to you.”
(Workshop participant quote)
Views on heritage funding overall
Just under half (47%) of Bradford‟s residents are aware of the Heritage Lottery
Fund. This is lower than the average proportion across all twelve locations featured
40
as part of this study, where 56% of local residents are aware of the organisation.
Awareness is lowest among Bradford‟s younger residents, with only 30% of 18-34s
saying they are aware of HLF.
% of local residents aware of Heritage Lottery Fund
Unaware
52%
Aware
47%
Q14. Have you heard of the Heritage Lottery Fund? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
Once again, this difference may be attributable to lower per capita investment in
Bradford, and what stakeholders saw as a lack of visibility in Bradford. Workshop
participants were asked at the end of the workshop about what, of all the
information they had been presented with, had surprised them most: while one
response explicitly highlighted the relatively small amount of funding received by
Bradford, others were surprised by how much had been spent in the area,
suggesting that stakeholders were correct in saying that the investments that are
made in the area are not visible to residents.
That parks are part of the heritage,
things in my area like Roberts Park
The impact of
volunteer groups on
regeneration of things
like Roberts Park
That the Heritage Fund spent £5.6bn and we
didn’t get much in Bradford, even as a large city
The size of the figures, the
amount spent by the Lottery Fund
The amount of money available
for projects that receive funding
What was surprising to
know was that there is
investment taking place
in Bradford to improve
heritage sites and I was
unaware of it
The thing that surprised me most …
(Selected workshop participants‟ responses to post-questionnaire)
Whilst levels of awareness of HLF itself vary, the workshop revealed that although
some were aware of a connection between HLF and the National Lottery, most had
very little understanding of how HLF is funded or who invests in heritage. Most
participants were surprised at the extent and nature of heritage funding after
being shown a presentation on the topic, while the discussion that followed
suggested that few had detailed prior knowledge about either.
However, workshop participants were supportive of Lottery money being spent on
heritage and this is reinforced in the quantitative survey, which demonstrates that
55% of Bradford‟s residents believe that the £21.3m invested in the ten selected
41
heritage projects is a good or excellent use of Lottery money. Only 15% of local
residents believe it is a poor use of Lottery money.
% of local residents believing investment in Bradford’s
heritage to be a good use of Lottery money
Excellent use of
Lottery money
18%
Good use of Lottery
money
38%
Just OK use of Lottery
money
26%
Poor use of Lottery
money
Very poor use of
Lottery money
10%
5%
Q15. The Heritage Lottery Fund has invested £21,293,598 in the 10 projects we’ve mentioned to you in Bradford. To what
extent to you agree or disagree that this has been good use of Lottery money? [Base: 350 adult residents of Bradford]
While this demonstrates clear majority support for continued Lottery investment in
local heritage, support in Bradford is lower than in the other eleven locations
featured as part of this study. Across all 12, an average of 69% of local residents
believe local investment in heritage to be a good or excellent use of Lottery
money, while only 8% believe it to be poor use.
What makes small and large heritage projects successful
In the workshop with residents of Bradford, some of the discussion was based
around the different impacts that small and large heritage projects have on local
communities, as well as the outcomes that local residents expected of both types
of project. Helen Speight from the Move On project, a small project which aimed
to create an oral history of the Roma, Gypsy and Traveller communities, and Martin
Bijl from the Roberts Park restoration, a large-scale capital project, both gave
brief presentations on the objectives and local impact of their respective projects.
Split into two tables, one focusing on small projects and the other on large
projects, the participants then discussed the benefits of each category and devised
rules for what would make a small or large project successful. Another exercise,
intended to understand what participants deemed the most important impacts of
heritage projects, required them to design an application form for funding, with
one table again focusing on small projects while the other focused on larger
projects. This was followed by a plenary discussion of the respective benefits of
large and small projects.
These exercises demonstrated that participants expected some common
requirements of both small and large projects. Both should to be accessible to
local people (in terms of affordability) and should not be of exclusive benefit to a
small group of people.
Some participants expressed concerns about the Move On project after the
presentation, primarily because they thought that it was too focused on a certain
section of the community (the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities) and
because the wider community had little opportunity to benefit from the project.
42
Participants criticised the project not for being about only a small segment of the
community but for also appearing to be only for that segment. A more publiclyaccessible output from the project was deemed desirable. The Roberts Park
project, by contrast, was perceived as open to all the local population,
irrespective of whether or not they make use of it.
A related requirement, according to workshop participants, common to both small
and large projects was publicity. As at the workshops in the other locations
featured as part of this study, participants often bemoaned their own lack of
awareness of local sites and projects and believed that the full benefits of local
heritage investment would only be realised if local people are aware of the sites
and projects on offer in their area.
The questions devised in the application form exercise reflect these areas of
overlap.
The questions that the table devising an application form for large projects
designed included:






How much money will it cost and how will it be financed?
How will it affect the community and who will it benefit?
Where is the project located and how will visitors get there?
What is the long-term plan for the project (e.g. maintenance)?
How would you raise awareness about the project?
How many people will it attract and what kind of people?
Similarly, the table designing the application form for small projects included the
following questions:





Who will benefit? And who will take part in the project?
Where is it located?
What are the long-term plans after the project finishes?
How will you market it?
What are the entry fees?
There were some differences in the impacts expected of large and small projects,
however. There was a greater emphasis on the economic impacts of larger
projects, with participants stressing the importance of attracting people to the
area (as well as attracting local visitors) as well as the need to create jobs in the
area. By contrast, participants on the table focusing on small projects emphasised
the need for building community spirit, by encouraging pride, involving the local
community and developing local skills.
1. Needs to attract people to the area
2. Needs to engage local people to visit (must be publicity to raise awareness and
needs to be affordable/free)
3. Shouldn‟t be in the most deprived areas otherwise tourists won‟t visit
4. Needs to be maintenance and a long-term strategy
5. Should create jobs
(Workshop participants‟ rules for a large local heritage project)
1. Involve the local community
2. Encourage local pride
3. Contribute to training/skills for locals
43
4. Accessible to all
5. Improving local people‟s lives
(Workshop participants‟ rules for a small local heritage project)
In the subsequent plenary discussion, workshop participants agreed that both large
and small projects are important and both are perceived to positively impact on
local communities. However, participants were more inclined to appreciate the
benefits of larger projects.
This was for two main reasons. One was that larger projects are more likely to be
permanent fixtures and targeted at all local residents (as well as tourists) rather
than just a specified segment of the community, which meant participants were
more likely to be able to participate themselves.
“From a selfish point of view, I don‟t see the benefit from a smaller project. I want
something tangible that I can use myself.”
Workshop participant quote
The second reason was that larger projects are more likely to benefit the local
economy, primarily by attracting tourists and businesses to the area. This was a
particularly important factor in Bradford, where the city‟s economic decline was
always at the front of participants‟ minds – and large-scale heritage projects are
one of the few visible signs of investment.
44
Appendix 1: Local resident workshop (in depth)
Key insights from workshop

Workshop participants felt very attached to Bradford and felt that its negative
external reputation was exaggerated. However, while they were proud of (and
often nostalgic for) the city‟s past as a regional powerhouse, participants
expressed some embarrassment at the way it had declined in recent decades.
This was directed particularly at the lack of industry and employment in the
area, as well as the neglected appearance of the city centre and high crime
rates.

They demonstrated a broad understanding of their city‟s heritage and were
often very aware of its history as a successful industrial hub, usually due to
stories passed on to them by relatives. Family histories and personal stories
were particularly important to British Asian workshop participants and their
conception of local heritage.

Workshop participants reported mixed levels of participation with local
heritage sites and projects – being more likely to visit as part of a family
activity or after retirement.

There was strong support for greater publicity and promotion of local heritage
sites and projects; while participants thought that enough is being done to
attract visitors to the area, they thought that more could be done to engage
locals.

There was some awareness of investment in the area‟s heritage in the
workshop, particularly in the regeneration of Bradford‟s parks, but most
participants were surprised when they were informed how much had been
invested.

Participants were supportive of Lottery funding for local heritage, although a
minority believed that more should be invested in the area (and that Bradford
had received relatively little, especially of the total invested in the whole of
the country).

Workshop participants thought that heritage investment is important because it
brings a number of benefits locally, particularly in terms of employment,
improvements to the city‟s appearance, and strengthening community pride.

Participants thought that being accessible, inclusive and well-publicised are
important criteria for a successful heritage project, while smaller projects
should also aim to build community spirit and larger ones should boost the local
economy.
Objectives
The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) was established in 1994 to sustain the UK‟s
heritage by investing in projects that will have a lasting impact on the communities
and areas in which they are located. Since then, it has allocated more than £5.5
billion to over 35,000 projects across the UK.
45
To celebrate this achievement, and to mark its 20th anniversary, HLF commissioned
BritainThinks to conduct research in 12 locations across the UK.
The aim of the research is to understand the cumulative impact of HLF investment.
Within this overall aim, the objective of the research is to understand how well
HLF is delivering on the following outcomes:
Heritage outcomes
With our investment, heritage will be:


In better condition
Better interpreted and explained
Outcomes for communities
With our investment:



More people, and a wider range of people will have engaged with heritage
Local communities will be boosted
Local areas/communities will be a better place to live, work or visit
In order to understand the public‟s view of heritage funding in Bradford,
BritainThinks held a half-day workshop on 18th March 2014 with 14 members of the
public.
Recruitment
A specialist recruiter recruited residents living in Bradford. Residents living in the
following postcode areas were eligible for recruitment:





BD1 - BD9
BD10 8
BD12 0
BD18 1
BD18 2




BD18 3
BD19 3
BD19 4
BD19 6
In addition, the following requirements were also set for recruitment:









Equal numbers of men and women
Equal numbers of those with children living at home and those without
children living at home
A range of ages
A range of social grades
A representative mix of ethnicities
A range of levels of engagement with heritage
A mix of levels of Lottery playing
All participants had to be eligible to pay tax in the UK
Those working in market research, the media, museums or galleries, the
arts or for galleries were excluded from the research
46
Structure and content of the workshop
Participants were divided into two tables of seven, with a mix of participants on
each table.
Over the course of the four-hour session, participants took part in a series of table
and plenary discussions covering:




Their views of Bradford
Their attitude towards and engagement with local heritage
The benefits of heritage
What criteria should be used to judge whether or not a heritage project has
been successful
In addition, a number of exercises were used throughout the day to build
knowledge, stimulate discussion and gauge personal feelings and responses. The
following exercises were used:








A pre-task: All participants were asked to bring to the workshop an item or
picture that represented what Bradford‟s heritage meant to them
A „free writing‟ exercise: participants were given 5 minutes and asked to
write down everything that comes to mind when they think of heritage
A table brainstorm to generate lists of the 5 best things about Bradford, the
5 worst things about Bradford and 5 things that have improved about
Bradford in recent years
Two short presentations, one from a representative of a large project that
had received HLF funding in Bradford and one from a representative of a
smaller project
A table brainstorm to generate a list of rules for what a good small/large
local heritage project looks like, followed by a presentation from each
table
A birth announcement exercise: participants were asked to imagine that a
new small local heritage site/project was being created and write a birth
announcement for it
An obituary exercise: participants were asked to imagine that all the local
heritage had died, and wrote its obituary using questions as prompts
Funding application exercise: participants were asked to design an
application form for funding for a small/large project, before reversing
roles and completing the application form, imagining that they were part of
a team applying for funding for a small/large local heritage project
Select copies or transcripts of some of the outputs from these exercises can be
found below.
Filming
With participants‟ consent, the workshop was filmed, and some participants also
took part in „vox pop‟ interviews, discussing their impressions of the afternoon.
Incentives
Participants received an incentive to compensate them for their time and cover
any costs they may have incurred as a result of attending.
47
Atmosphere at the workshop
The workshop was lively, and participants were highly engaged with the subject
matter, as demonstrated by their animated debates. Participants were keen to
share their views and experiences and readily criticised aspects of their local area
– though in good humour.
Examples of workshop materials
Free-writing exercise
Write down everything you can think of about local heritage in Bradford and the
emotions you associate with heritage
Response 1:
When I think of local heritage in Bradford I think of...

Saltaire World Heritage Site, Salts Mills, mills, factories, wool,
textiles, cultural diversity, museums (industrial, media,
Bronte), family.
And I feel...

I love Saltaire. Wish I had been around earlier to witness how
great Bradford apparently was, according to my nan. I also
feel disappointed that I didn‟t see how Bradford used to be.
Response 2:
When I think of local heritage in Bradford I think of...

Textile industry, museums, well-preserved Victorian villages,
multicultural society, history.
And I feel...

When you‟re thinking about Bradford‟s heritage, what comes
to mind is the history we have and how it developed through
time. Looking back at the history, you tend to realise that there
isn‟t enough appreciation of it – not enough is out there to
draw people‟s attention to what Bradford has to offer.
Response 3:
When I think of local heritage in Bradford I think of...

Yorkshire sayings, poetry and songs, many of the buildings, but
more important to me are some of the local traditions that are
kept up, e.g. the canal boat pageant in Skipton.
48
And I feel...

Quite proud of the many things that happen around Bradford
and would like to show and introduce people to these events
and cultures. I am proud of being a first generation
Northener.
Response 4:
When I think of local heritage in Bradford I think of...

Textile industry, old buildings, trams, museums, landscapes,
cultures, Saltaire village
And I feel...

Bradford is not the same any more and I hope that we can
keep what‟s left. Because Bradford has a history so that we can
show and tell our children. I think that what should be done is
to teach school children and show them videos and slides to
encourage them to take an interest. They should get people to
do tours of Bradford‟s heritage sites to refresh their memories.
5 things about Bradford:
The five best things about Bradford are:





Food
Fashion
Close to countryside, lakes, coast
Cultural diversity
The people
The five worst things about Bradford are:





Shopping
Pubs closing
Litter
Crime
No jobs, don‟t make things anymore
The five things that have improved the most about Bradford are:




City parks
Creativity (galleries, etc)
Roads
Some new shopping
49
Obituary exercise:
Imagine all Bradford‟s heritage has disappeared. Write an obituary for the city‟s
heritage.
Think about:











What would Bradford look like?
How would people feel?
Why did all these heritage sites die?
What could have been done to save them?
Who would come to the funeral?
What would they say in the funeral speech?
What kind of atmosphere would there be at the wake?
What would we do instead of going to heritage sites?
What would replace heritage?
Quote from the Prime Minister
What was the headline in The Sun newspaper / The Guardian?
Response 1:

Bradford, you were a beautiful place. The history we all loved
and enjoyed has now left us. From the glory of the Alhambra to
the grandeur of the Cartwright Hall. The ducks that once swam
in the pond of Peel Park fly the skies in search of a new home.
Where did you go Bradford? The Industrial Museum, a symbol
of our growth and past successes is now but rubble beneath my
feet. How will my children see what has gone before them? How
will they embrace nature and the beauty that is around. No
more heritage, no more serenity, no more peace.
Response 2:

Bradford is on the map for its heritage. After losing all this,
Bradford would be a place filled with sadness. All the memories
and different old historic buildings are gone. In order to save
them we should have used them more and got people to visit
more, All the people that visited would miss them, they would
be replaced by new buildings or shopping parks. What a shame
– Bradford has lost its pride and will never be the same again.
Response 3:

“Bradford loses all its heritage sites.” Bradford would look
more run down than it does now and people would feel
disappointed. The sites died because of a lack of funding, they
could have been made more appealing to people.
50
Response 4:

Today Bradford sank without a trace. It is a dead metropolis
due to losing its entire heritage. The Prime Minister said: “Due
to cutbacks and governmental re-direction of funds, Bradford
is to become a tomb.” A reported 85% of the community have
left the area, moving to Europe. “At least it is sunny there”, said
one person packing their car with personal possessions.
Birth announcement exercise:
Please write a birth announcement for a new small local heritage site/project.
Think about:








What is the new site/project?
Where is it located?
What happens at the new site/project?
Who is expected to go there?
How do local people feel about the new site/project?
What impact is it going to have on the local area?
What is the headline in the Telegraph and Argus?
What would a quote from the Mayor say?
Response 1:

Yorkshire is creating its own dictionary! Based on local
phrases, sayings and songs. It will be available throughout
Yorkshire in local tourist spots. This should be interesting to all
people who enjoy a different approach to local things. The
headline would be: Yorkshire slangs back!
Response 2:

Opening soon, an old chemist‟s shop in Stony Lane. You‟ll be
able to see how pharmacists in Victorian times made up
medicines and cosmetics. A lot of older people will be interested
as they will have fond memories of the old chemist shop.
Response 3:

Bradford builds new Victorian railway station. Located at
Bradford‟s Forster Square, the Victorian station will reflect the
city‟s proud heritage, as well as providing shelter for the many
commuters. Attached to the station will be a building housing
artifacts from the Victorian period and two permanent staff
will be in attendance.
51
Agenda for the workshop
AIM
Activity
Timings
Arrivals
Sign-in and signatures for filming permission
slips
12:3013:00
Materials
Lunch and arrivals
Welcome and
introductions
Welcome, introduction, briefing about the
day, ground rules
13:0013:20
Table introductions:
Participant/moderators to introduce
themselves.
Pre-task: Bring something that represents
what Bradford’s heritage means to you:
Participants to show what they brought and
explain why they chose it and what it means
to them.
Feedback to the room:
One representative from each table to
feedback to the room – describe the kinds of
items that have been brought and summarise
the discussion.
OUTPUT: Conversation to be recorded on flip
chart.
Background
perceptions
and personal
attitudes
Table session:
Free writing exercise: Write down everything
you can think of about local heritage in
Bradford [get participants to keep writing
for five minutes] and the emotions you
associate with heritage – think about how it
makes you feel





13:20 –
13:50
Blank
paper and
pens
What did you write?
How important is local heritage to
you?
What does it mean to you?
What emotions do you have when you
think about Bradford‟s heritage?
What are specific examples of
emotions you have felt at particular
places you have visited?
52
Views of
Bradford
Table session:
What words would you use to describe
Bradford?








13:50
14:10
5 best
things
worksheet
5 worst
things
worksheet
How long have you lived in Bradford?
What made you move here?
What is Bradford like as a place to
live?
And a place to work?
What about as a place to bring up
children?
What sort of people live in Bradford?
What is Bradford known for?
How has it changed over the last 20
years?
5 things
that have
improved
worksheet
What are the 5 best things about Bradford?

Discuss and agree 5 things as a table
What are the 5 worst things about
Bradford?

Discuss and agree 5 things as a table
What are the 5 things that have improved
the most about Bradford?

Discuss and agree 5 things as a table
Plenary session



Bradford,
specific sites
and heritage
behaviour
Each table shares their lists
If a friend or relative was visiting
Bradford, where would you take
them?
o How would you feel about
taking them there?
Where would you not take them?
o How would you feel if you had
to take them there?
Table session:
What is heritage? What constitutes a place of
heritage?
14:10 –
14:40
By heritage, I mean things like museums and
galleries, parks, historic buildings and
monuments, landscapes and wildlife sites,
libraries and archives, and also things like
local cultures, traditions and storytelling.
53



Describe Bradford‟s heritage
What constitutes heritage in
Bradford?
What projects or sites can you think
of specifically?
o Historic buildings
o Historic parks or gardens
o Historic industrial
sites/transport systems
o Historic places of worship
o Historic monuments
o Archaeological sites
o Sports heritage sites
How important is heritage to people who live
in Bradford?


How does heritage affect Bradford as
a place to live?
And as a place to visit?
What, if anything, makes Bradford unique?

How does Bradford‟s heritage
compare to other places?
How accessible is Bradford‟s heritage to the
people who live here?

Do people have equal access
wherever they live?
How often do you go to heritage sites in
Bradford?


Why do you go?
Who do you go with?
What do you get out of visiting heritage
sites?
Probe on:




Educational
Inspiration
Understanding about other people or
cultures
Enjoyment
Non-visitors: why haven‟t you been to any
heritage sites in the last 12 months?

Where do you go instead?
54
What impact do you think heritage projects
and sites have on other people‟s lives?


Who benefits?
How do they benefit?
Do you ever travel to other cities or
countries to visit heritage sites?



Where have you been / what have
you visited?
Did you go there specifically to visit a
heritage site?
What did you get out of it?
What impact do you think heritage projects
and sites have on people‟s lives?
BRAINSTORM AS A TABLE:


What are the key benefits of heritage?
To whom?
OUTPUT: Conversation to be recorded on flip
chart.
Heritage in
Bradford
Plenary session: Heritage in Bradford
BT team to give a short presentation about
the heritage in Bradford.
Presentation to cover:


14:40–
15:10
Presentati
on on
heritage
in
Bradford
Brief description of HLF
Heritage investment in Bradford –
amount invested and example
projects
Presentations: 2 representatives from local
heritage projects to give short
presentations



One representative to be from a large
project, one to be from a small
project.
Each presentation to last max. 10
minutes
Presentations to cover:
o A short description of the project
o Who the project is targeted at
o What the benefits of the project
are, and to whom
o Amount HLF invested in the
project
55
The benefits
of smaller and
larger projects
Table session:
Each table to focus on one of the two
projects presented on.
What did you think of that?
What, if anything, sounded good about that
project?

15:1015:40
Workshee
t: What
does a
good
small/larg
e local
heritage
project
look like?
Why?
And what, if anything, sounded less good?


Why?
How would you improve this?
How confident are you that it will deliver the
benefits it is claimed?



Are there any other benefits that the
project will deliver?
Who will benefit?
How long-lasting do you think the
benefits will be?
o Does this matter? Why?
Who do you think will go to the project?



Local people?
People from further away?
How widespread do you think the
appeal of the project will be?
o Does this matter? Why?
What impact do you think the project will
have on the local area?










Employment
Development of skills amongst local
people
Tourism
Impact on the local area as a place to
live
Local pride
Preservation/restoration of a physical
space
Preservation/restoration of historical
artefacts
Impact on understanding of
Bradford‟s past
Impact on people‟s attitudes towards
other people and cultures
Impact on local people‟s access to
56
heritage
Does this project offer value for money?
Why?
Do you support HLF money being invested in
projects such as this?

Why?
BRAINSTORM: WHAT DOES A GOOD
SMALL/LARGE HERITAGE PROJECT LOOK LIKE?
Plenary session: Each table presents their
‘rules’ for what a good small/large local
heritage project looks like to the other





Why is x particularly important?
What, if anything, do you particularly
agree with?
And what, if anything do you
particularly disagree with?
Is there anything missing from these
rules?
Tease out any differences between
the two lists
BREAK
15:4015:55
Birth
SHOW REEL OF PICTURES OF BRADFORD’S
announcement HERITAGE TO PLAY ON SCREEN TO ACT AS
exercise
VISUAL STIMULUS
Individual writing exercise:


Imagine that a new small local
heritage site/project is being created
We want you to write a birth
announcement
15:5516:15
Handout:
Things to
think
about for
the birth
announce
ment
exercise
Things to think about:







What is the new site/project?
Where is it located?
What happens at the new
site/project?
Who is expected to go there?
How do local people feel about the
new site/project?
What impact is it going to have on the
local area?
What is the headline in the Telegraph
57

and Argus?
What would a quote from the Mayor
say?
Plenary session: Residents share their birth
announcements
Obituary
exercise
SHOW REEL OF PICTURES OF BRADFORD’S
HERITAGE TO PLAY ON SCREEN TO ACT AS
VISUAL STIMULUS
16:1516:35
Individual writing exercise:


We want you to imagine that all
heritage sites and projects have died.
Think about what Bradford would be
like if all its heritage was gone
We want you to write an obituary
Handout:
Thinks to
think
about for
the
obituary
exercise
(Handout) Think about things like:











What would Bradford look like?
How would people feel?
Why did all these heritage sites die?
What could have been done to save
them?
Who would come to the funeral
What would they say in the funeral
speech
What kind of atmosphere would it be
at the wake
What would we do instead of going to
heritage sites?
What would replace heritage?
Quote from the Prime Minister
What was the headline in The Sun
newspaper / The Guardian?
PLENARY: volunteers to read out their
obituaries
Overall, how important is heritage for:



Applying for
heritage
funding
You personally
For Bradford
For the country
Table session
One table to focus on small heritage projects
and one table to focus on large heritage
projects.
16:3517:10
BRAINSTORM: Imagine you are HLF. Design
58
an application form for funding for
small/large heritage projects.
What kind of information would you ask for?









Budget
Aim of the project
Benefits
Impact nationally
Impact locally
Who would be involved in the project
Who would come to the project
How would you raise awareness of the
project
Entry costs
Now imagine you are a large/small heritage
project applying for funding. What answers
would you give to the questions on the form?






Budget
Aim of the project
o Benefits
o Economic
o Tourism
o Jobs
o Local pride
o Education
o Preserving national/local
history
o Increasing understanding of
national/local history
o Increasing access to
national/local history
o Encouraging social cohesion
o Improving the area as a place
to live
o Changing people‟s attitudes
o Training for staff and
volunteers
o Development of skills amongst
the local community
Impact nationally
Impact locally
Who would be involved in the project
o Local government
o Local volunteers
o People across the UK
What would the audience be for the
project?
o Locals
o People from other areas
o Families
59


o Young people
o School trips
o Older people
How would you encourage people to
come or take part?
o Local press
o National press
o Advertising
Entry costs
Plenary session:
Each table presents their forms and what
they would put in them to the room





Thanks and
close
What were the differences between
small and large projects?
And what were the similarities?
Why do you think this is?
Do you think one type of project is
better than the other? Why/why not?
Where do you think the balance
between funding small, local projects
and much larger projects lies? Why?
HLF to thank and close?
17:1017:20
60
Appendix 2: Stakeholder discussion guide
Focus
Questions
Introduction
BritainThinks is an independent research agency and we are
working with the Heritage Lottery Fund to conduct research looking
at the effect of heritage funding. We are focusing the research in
12 different areas of the UK and Bradford has been chosen as one
of the areas. The research involves desk research looking at
statistics and so on, a quantitative survey of residents and a
workshop with local residents. As part of the desk research we are
interviewing a number of stakeholders in the area to understand
their views on the local area and the role that heritage plays. So
you are one of six interviews we are doing in Bradford and the
surrounding area.
Timing
The interview is informal will last around half an hour. We will not
tell HLF that you have taken part or attribute any quotes to you
unless we have your explicit consent to do so. As a thank you we
would like to send you a summary of the findings from the
stakeholder interviews we are doing in the area.
Request permission to record



Views on
Bradford as
an area



Heritage in
Bradford


Could you start by giving me an overview of your
background and role as XXXX
Do you live and work in Bradford?
Have you been involved in any HLF funded projects in
Bradford and the surrounding area?
What words would you use to describe Bradford as an area?
o What about as a place to live?
o And a place to work?
o What sort of people live in Bradford?
How has it changed over the last 20 years?
o Demographics
o Regeneration
o Economy
o Tourism
o Community
How would people who live in Bradford and the surrounding
area describe it?
o What do you think they would say is good about it?
o And not so good about it?
How important is heritage to the area? (By heritage I mean
things like museums and galleries, parks, historic buildings
and monuments, landscapes and wildlife sites, libraries and
archives and also things like local cultures, traditions and
memories)
Is heritage important to the people that live in Bradford and
the surrounding area? How so?
o Does the public appreciate heritage?
o How do you think people define heritage and what it
constitutes?
61
Do the public define this differently to stakeholders?
Do you think the public have a clear idea of what
heritage is and what a heritage site would be? Why?
How important is heritage in Bradford and the surrounding
area compared to its role in other areas? Is there anything
that makes heritage particularly important in Bradford and
the surrounding area?
Is heritage a topic of conversation that you have with
people?
o In your job
With residents
o
o



Heritage
specific
projects
The
cumulative
effect of
heritage
funding

Have you been involved in any specific heritage projects in
the area?
 Ask about specific projects
o What were the aims of the project?
o Who was involved from the area – stakeholders,
volunteers, residents?
o What were / are the benefits of the project?
o How would you describe the value of the project?
And to whom?
How was it funded?




HLF






What do you know about the history of funding for Bradford
and the surrounding area‟s heritage over the last 20 years?
What has been the cumulative effect of that funding?
o From a professional point of view
o From a resident point of view
How has funding for heritage in Bradford and the
surrounding area affected
o The local economy
o Tourism in the area
o Regeneration
People‟s views on Bradford and the surrounding area as a
place to live and work
All
How much do you know about the Heritage Lottery Fund?
What projects have they been involved with / funded in
Bradford and the surrounding area?
What role does the HLF play? (e.g. just money? Support?)
What impact has HLF funding in Bradford and the
surrounding area had that you are aware of?
o Heritage conservation / restoration
o Impact on people and communities in the area
o Impact on tourism in the area
Has HLF funding in Bradford and the surrounding area over
the last 20 years represented value for money? How so?
o If you had to rate HLF funding‟s value for money in
Bradford and the surrounding area on a scale of one
to ten, where one is very poor value for money, and
ten is excellent value for money, where would you
place it?
As well as the projects you are aware of, HLF has also
62
supported (refer to projects they have not mentioned
spontaneously – see list), what impact, if any does this have
on your view of whether or not HLF funding offers value for
money?
 Has HLF funding in the UK as a whole over the last 20 years
represented value for money? How so?
o And if you had to rate HLF funding‟s value for money
in the UK as a whole on a scale of one to ten, where
one is very poor value for money, and ten is
excellent value for money, where would you place
it?
 What does good use of HLF money look like?
Thinking about all the different things that lottery money is spent
on, do you think that the public would „tick the box‟ for heritage?
Why?
The value of
heritage
Summary





What would you say are the wider socio-economic benefits
of investment in heritage?
o What are the cumulative benefits of heritage to
Bradford and the surrounding area/this region/the
country as a whole?
How important is heritage to society?
How important is it to communicate the value of heritage?
In summary, what would you say are the key benefits of
heritage for citizens?
Is there anything I haven‟t asked you that you would like to
add?
Thank you very much for taking part. We will be writing a report
for HLF, and may wish to use quotes from this interview.



Are you happy for us to say that your organization took part?
Are you happy for us to say that you personally took part?
And would you like any quotes we use to be attributed or
anonymous?
And would you be happy for the Heritage Lottery Fund to recontact
you in relation to this research in the next year? [IF YES: Secure
contact details]
Thanks and close
Record email address for summary report
63
Appendix 3: Local residents survey questionnaire
Section 1: Views of Bradford as a place to live
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY. DO NOT READ OUT.
Q1
How long have you lived in Bradford?
0-2 years
(1)
2-5 years
(2)
6-10 years
(3)
11-19 years
(4)
20-30 years
(5)
31- 40 years
(6)
41- 50 years
(7)
51 – 60 years
(8)
61 years or more
(9)
DK
(10)
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q2
How much do you agree or disagree that Bradford is a good place to live?
Agree strongly
(1)
Agree slightly
(2)
Neither
(3)
Disagree slightly
(4)
Disagree strongly
(5)
DK
(6)
[Source: HLF Local Resident Survey]
64
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q3
Over the time that you have lived in the area, has Bradford got better or
worse as a place to live?
Much better now
(1)
A little better now
(2)
About the same
(3)
A little worse now
(4)
Much worse now
(5)
DK
(6)
[Source: Adapted from HLF Local Resident Survey]
Section 2: Engagement with heritage
READ OUT: The next questions are about your attitudes towards heritage. By
heritage I mean things like museums and galleries, parks, historic buildings and
monuments, landscapes and wildlife sites, libraries and archives and also things
like local cultures, traditions and story telling.
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Q5
Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage, how much would you say you know
about it?
A lot
(1)
A little
(2)
Very little
(3)
Nothing
(4)
DK
(5)
65
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Q6
Overall, how important is heritage:
a) for you personally?
b) for your local area?
c) for the country?
Very important
(1)
Fairly important
(2)
Not very important
(3)
Not at all important
(4)
DK
(5)
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Q7
Thinking generally about what Bradford has to offer in terms of heritage
sites and projects to visit or get involved with, overall, how satisfied or
dissatisfied would you say you are?
Very satisfied
(1)
Fairly satisfied
(2)
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
(3)
Fairly dissatisfied
(4)
Very dissatisfied
(5)
DK
(6)
66
Section 3: Awareness and visits to HLF funded sites in Bradford
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q8
I am going to read you a list of heritage sites and projects in Bradford. For
each one, please tell me if you are aware of it and, if so, whether or not
you have visited or taken part?










National Media Museum
Cartwright Hall Art Gallery
Saltaire World Heritage Site
Bradford Industrial Museum
Historic building restoration work carried out in Bradford City Centre
Historic building restoration work carried out in the Manningham area
Lister Park
South Pennine Moors
Heaton Woods
Bradford Bulls/Odsal Stadium Rugby League Archive
Yes – I was aware of this and have
visited it or taken part
(1)
Yes – I was aware of this but have
not visited it or taken part
(2)
No – I was not aware of this
(2)
DK
(3)
ASK ALL WHO CODE 1 AT Q8 (ALL WHO HAVE BEEN TO A HERITAGE SITE OR
PROJECT). ROTATE START. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q9
Thinking about your experiences with these heritage sites and projects in
Bradford, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements?
a) I enjoyed visiting or taking part in these heritage sites and projects
b) Visiting or taking part in these heritage sites and projects has helped me
understand more about the history of Bradford
c) Visiting or taking part in these heritage sites and projects has made me
have a better understanding of other people’s cultures
d) Bradford’s heritage sites and projects are well-maintained
e) I would recommend that other people come to Bradford to experience its
heritage sites and projects
Agree strongly
(1)
Agree slightly
(2)
67
Q9
Thinking about your experiences with these heritage sites and projects in
Bradford, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements?
a) I enjoyed visiting or taking part in these heritage sites and projects
b) Visiting or taking part in these heritage sites and projects has helped me
understand more about the history of Bradford
c) Visiting or taking part in these heritage sites and projects has made me
have a better understanding of other people’s cultures
d) Bradford’s heritage sites and projects are well-maintained
e) I would recommend that other people come to Bradford to experience its
heritage sites and projects
Neither
(3)
Disagree slightly
(4)
Disagree strongly
(5)
DK
(6)
[SOURCE: Adapted from HLF Visitor‟s Survey]
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Q10 Thinking about heritage sites and projects in Bradford over the time you’ve
lived in the area, would you say they are…?
Much better now
(1)
A little better now
(2)
About the same
(3)
A little worse now
(4)
Much worse now
(5)
DK
(6)
68
Section 4: Local quality of life
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY. ROTATE STATEMENTS
Q11 Thinking about Bradford’s local heritage sites and projects, how far would
you say you agree or disagree with the following statements?
a) Bradford’s heritage sites and projects make me feel proud of my local
area
b) Bradford’s heritage sites and projects are important for my personal
sense of identity
c) Bradford’s heritage sites and projects make it a better place to live
d) Bradford’s heritage sites and projects make it a place that other people
are likely to visit
Agree strongly
(1)
Agree slightly
(2)
Neither
(3)
Disagree slightly
(4)
Disagree strongly
(5)
DK
(6)
ASK FOR A MAXIMUM OF 5 HERITAGE PROJECTS OR SITES THAT WAS AWARE OF AT
Q8 [ALL WHO CODE 1 OR 2 AT Q8]. ROTATE PROJECTS. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q12
I’d like you to think now about what you get out of having heritage sites
and projects in the local area. What effect does having [insert project
name] in the area have on your personal quality of life?
Much better
(1)
A little better
(2)
Neither
(3)
A little worse
(4)
Much worse
(5)
DK
(6)
69
ASK ALL WHO ARE AWARE OF A HERITAGE SITE OR PROJECT [ALL WHO CODE 1 OR 2
AT Q8]. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q13
And thinking about all of the heritage sites and projects that you know
about in Bradford together, please rate the impact that they have on your
personal quality of life in Bradford. Please answer between 0 and 10,
where 0 is no impact at all, and 10 is a very large impact.
0
(0)
1
(1)
2
(2)
3
(3)
4
(4)
5
(5)
6
(6)
7
(7)
8
(8)
9
(9)
10
(10)
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY
Q14 Have you heard of the Heritage Lottery Fund?
Yes
(1)
No
(2)
DK
(3)
[Source: HLF Local Resident Survey]
70
Q15 The Heritage Lottery Fund has invested £21,293,598 in the 10 projects we
have mentioned to you, in Bradford. To what extent do you agree or
disagree that this has been good use of Lottery money?
Excellent use of Lottery money
(1)
Good use of Lottery money
(2)
Just OK use of Lottery money
(3)
Poor use of Lottery money
(4)
Very poor use of Lottery money
(5)
Don‟t know
(6)
ASK ALL. SINGLE CODE ONLY.
Q16 Do you play the National Lottery?
[INTERVIEWER TO PROBE FOR FREQUENCY]
Yes, I regularly play the National
Lottery (once a week or more)
(1)
Yes, I sometimes play the National
Lottery (once a month)
(2)
Yes, but only rarely (less than once a
month)
(3)
No, I never play the National Lottery
(4)
DK
(5)
Refused
(6)
Demographics







Gender
Age
Ethnicity
Adults in household
Children in household
Occupational grouping (ABC1C2DE)
Postcode
Note on definitions:
„Disengaged‟ residents are those who say they know nothing (4) or don‟t know (5)
about local heritage at Question 5, believe heritage to be not very (3) or not at all
71
(4) important for themselves personally at Question 6a, and have visited two or
fewer heritage sites and project at Question 8.
„Engaged‟ residents are those who say they know a lot (1) about local heritage at
Question 5, believe heritage to be very (1) or quite (2) important for themselves
personally at Question 6a, and have visited between four and six heritage sites and
projects at Question 8.
„Super engaged‟ residents are those who say they know a lot (1) about local
heritage at Question 5, believe heritage to be very (1) or quite (2) important for
themselves personally at Question 6a, and have visited seven or more heritage
sites and projects at Question 8.
72
Appendix 4: Overview of HLF investment in Bradford
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
National Museum of
Photography, Film
and Television,
Bradford
6,081,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1995-96
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
Council, Arts,
Museums & Libra
Cartwright Hall Art
Gallery, Bradford
251,500
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1995-96
Saltaire United
Reform Church,
Shipley
Saltaire United
Reformed Church,
Shipley
240,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
1995-96
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
Bradford, Lister Park
3,220,500
Land and
biodiversity
1996-97
Standing
Conference of
South Pennine
Authorities and
Partner
South Pennine
Moors
377,800
Land and
biodiversity
1996-97
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
Council
Bradford City Hall
Bell Frame, Bradford
104,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
1996-97
Bradford Education
Library Service
Bradford's History
on CD ROM
39,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1996-97
National Media
Museum
Talbot Photogenic
Drawings
21,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1996-97
National Media
Museum
Hammer Film
Artefacts Collection Acquisition
94,600
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1997-98
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
Saltaire CAPS
54,375
Historic
buildings and
monuments
1997-98
Applicant
Project title
National Media
Museum
73
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
Bradford City Centre
CAPS
300,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
1998-99
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
Manningham CAPS
180,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
1998-99
Trustees of
Bradford
Synagogue
The Bradford
Synagogue,
Bradford, West
Yorkshire
83,800
Historic
buildings and
monuments
1998-99
West Yorkshire
Archive Service
West Yorkshire
Cosmos: Ethnic
Communities in
retrospect and
prospect
30,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1998-99
Bradford Industrial
Museum & Horses
at Work
Powerhouse,
Bradford Industrial
Museum
88,000
Industrial
maritime and
transport
1999-00
National Museum
of Science and
Industry
RPS Documentation
& Pilot Digital
Archive Project
61,700
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
1999-00
Serbian Orthodox
Church of Holy
Trinity
Serbian Orthodox
Church of Holy
Trinity
194,800
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2000-01
Church of God of
Prophecy, Bradford
Church of God of
Prophecy
151,700
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2000-01
West Yorkshire
Archive Service
Yorkshire Signpost:
Yorkshire's Access to
Archives Project
147,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2000-01
National Media
Museum
Early Panoramic
Photographs Acquisition
12,300
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2000-01
Applicant
Project title
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
74
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
St John the Baptist,
Clayton
63,700
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2001-02
National Media
Museum
Historic Television
Receivers Acquisition
28,400
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2001-02
QED
Celebrating 50 years
of cultural diversity
in Bradford & district
25,000
Intangible
heritage
2001-02
PCC of St John the
Evangelist, Bierley
St John the
Evangelist, Bierley,
Bradford
21,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2001-02
Royds Community
Association
Judy Woods Project
15,068
Intangible
heritage
2001-02
National Media
Museum
Acquisition of RPS
Collection
3,750,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2002-03
National Media
Museum
Lewis Carroll
Photographic
Artefacts acquisition
471,500
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2002-03
Christian Life
Church Bradford
Trust
Christian Life
Church, Shipley
105,300
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2002-03
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
Saltaire World
Heritage Site: Open
Spaces Restoration
& Management Plan
38,000
Land and
biodiversity
2002-03
Greengates and
District Community
Council
Greengate Local
History Project
7,248
Intangible
heritage
2002-03
Christian Life
Church Trust
Christian Life Church
174,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2003-04
Applicant
Project title
PCC St John the
Baptist, Clayton
75
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
St John the
Evangelist
87,618
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2003-04
West Yorkshire
Archive Service
This Is Our History
49,900
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2003-04
Saltaire Village
Society
Saltaire Living
History Project
24,750
Intangible
heritage
2003-04
Asian Cultural
Association
Teaching Asian
Traditional Music
24,200
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2003-04
National Media
Museum
Experience TV,
Bradford
400,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2004-05
The Bradford Bulls
Foundation
The Rugby League
Heritage Project
146,100
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2004-05
Promenade
Promotions (Prom
Prom)
We Do Like to be
Beside the Seaside! Reviving traditional
seaside
entertainment,
Bradford
49,900
Intangible
heritage
2004-05
West Yorkshire
Archive Service
Yorkshire Made Access to Business
Records in Yorkshire
45,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2004-05
Royds Community
Association
The Roots of Judy
Woods
24,604
Intangible
heritage
2004-05
Heaton Woods
Trust
Heaton's Woodland
Heritage
23,496
Intangible
heritage
2004-05
Applicant
Project title
St John the
Evangelist Bierley
PCC
76
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
Connect: People,
Place & Imagination
- Bradford
Museums, Galleries
& Heritage
Collections
1,154,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2005-06
Bradford South
Carnival
The Bradford South
Carnival
24,800
Intangible
heritage
2005-06
The Heaton Woods
Trust
Sean's Pond
Development,
Bradford
24,300
Land and
biodiversity
2005-06
Friends of Buck
Wood
A Breath of Fresh
Aire
23,844
Intangible
heritage
2005-06
The Royal
Entomological
Society
National Insect
Week 2006Bradford Project
13,500
Land and
biodiversity
2005-06
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
Roberts Park,
Saltaire
3,320,800
Land and
biodiversity
2006-07
Holy Trinity Parish
Church
HOLY TRINITY
143,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2006-07
Southern Pennines
Rural Regeneration
Company Ltd
South Pennine
Watersheds
Landscape Project
50,000
Land and
biodiversity
2007-08
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
Threads - Portrait of
a Nation (Bradford)
50,000
Intangible
heritage
2007-08
Southern Pennines
Rural Regeneration
Company Ltd.
(Pennine Prospects)
The South Pennines
Watershed
Landscape
1,978,500
Land and
biodiversity
2008-09
Saltaire United
Reformed Church
Saltaire United
Reformed Church
61,934
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2008-09
Applicant
Project title
City of Bradford
Metropolitan
District Council
77
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
'Coming of Age'
celebrating our
communities
through the Mela
48,600
Intangible
heritage
2008-09
Friends of Buck
Wood
A Breath of Ancient
Aire
24,300
Intangible
heritage
2008-09
Women's Oral
History Group Lesbian Identity
Project
Lesbian Identity
Project (LIP)
17,000
Intangible
heritage
2008-09
National Media
Museum
Miniature Julia
Margaret Cameron
Album
10,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
2008-09
Bradford
Environmental
Action Trust
Bradford Lost
Ancient Woodland
8,000
Land and
biodiversity
2008-09
Bradford Bulls
Foundation
Past Times
199,200
Intangible
heritage
2009-10
St Clement's PCC
Church of St
Clement
86,792
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2009-10
Saltaire URC
Saltaire United
Reformed Church
63,043
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2009-10
Bantams
Community
Programme
Bantam’s past
memories
49,400
Intangible
heritage
2009-10
All Saints PCC
Church of All Saints
47,930
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2009-10
Freedom Studios
The Mill
41,900
Intangible
heritage
2009-10
St Paul's Parochial
Church Council
Church of St Paul
158,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2010-11
Applicant
Project title
Bradford MD
Council
78
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
PARISH CHURCH OF
ST CHAD
80,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2010-11
Parochial Church
Council of Tong and
Holme Wood
St James' Tong Bell
Ringing Project
45,900
Intangible
heritage
2010-11
St Stephens
Parochial Church
Council
CHURCH OF ST
STEPHEN
190,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2011-12
The PCC of All
Saints
Church of All Saints
104,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2011-12
Deafinitions Ltd
Living Sign Language
50,000
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
Bradford Talking
Magazines Ltd
Deaf History Project
50,000
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
The Thornbury
Centre
Move on
49,900
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
HIVE Bradford
(formally Kirkgate
Studios and
Workshops)
The Fabric of
Bradford
49,700
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
Bradford
Synagogue
Making Their Mark Bradfords Jewish
Heritage
49,400
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
Womenzone
Community Centre
Shalvar Kameez
Heritage Project
49,200
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
Oriental Arts
(Bradford) Ltd
Cultural Connections
30,000
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
The Lighthouse
Group
HIPPO Project Heritage involving
people, places and
opportunities
23,700
Intangible
heritage
2011-12
St Stephens
Parochial Church
Council
Church of St Stephen
198,000
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2012-13
Applicant
Project title
Parochial Church
Council of St Chads
79
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Initial
decision
Learning Disability
Oral History Project
75,900
Intangible
heritage
2012-13
Bradford
Environmental
Action Trust
Swartha Wood
49,800
Land and
biodiversity
2012-13
Millan Centre
Hamari Yaadain Our memories
44,000
Intangible
heritage
2012-13
Consortia of Ethnic
Minority
Organisations
Changing Bradford
38,900
Intangible
heritage
2012-13
The Peace Museum
Routes to Peace
Heritage Trail
10,000
Community
heritage
2012-13
Snowgoose Writers
Community
Unheard Voices - the
Civilian Experience
of the First World
War in Yorkshire
6,800
Community
heritage
2012-13
St Paul's Church
Shipley
Quinquennial repairs
and enhancing
public awareness of
heritage at St Paul's
163,200
Historic
buildings and
monuments
2013-14
Bradford
Synagogue
Bradford Synagogue
103,900
Historic
buildings and
monuments
Bradford
Community
Environment
Project
Tackling The Roughs
(Sustainable
Woodland Learning)
79,100
Land and
biodiversity
Bradford UNESCO
City of Film
Bradford Film
History and Heritage
Uncovered and
Explained
35,900
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
Otley Road and
Barkerend
Environment
Project
BD3 Cultural
heritage gardening
project: garden
design and creation,
botany and local
workshops
10,000
Community
heritage
Applicant
Project title
Bradford Talking
Magazines Ltd
80
Grant
awarded
Heritage
area
Building our Future:
development and
integration of a
fundraising road
map for the Peace
Museum
8,100
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
Positive Negatives
(Making Best Use of
500,000 Images)
6,000
Museums
libraries
archives and
collections
Applicant
Project title
The Peace Museum
Bradford Industrial
Museum & Horses
at Work
Initial
decision
81