post by Katerina Alexiou

In the last year, a group of us from the Open University and the Glass-House Community Led Design engaged in a research project focussed on civic leadership. We teamed up with colleagues from other disciplines in the Open University interested in civil society and the voluntary sector, as well as a new non-academic partner, the Knowle West Media Centre in Bristol. We were all interested to explore the mechanisms and infrastructures needed to instigate collaboration between actors from different sectors involved in placemaking and to incubate civic projects and actions. 

The Incubating Civic Leadership (ICL) project supported two pilot projects, one in Redbridge, East London, in collaboration London Borough of Redbridge and Muslimah Sports Association and one in Bristol, with the Filwood Broadway Working Group of the Knowle West Alliance in Bristol. Both projects had an element of seeking to engage different groups of people in the community in discussions about plans for the area and to empower them to take action and develop ownership of changes in their public spaces. 

You can view this film summarising the project, the activities and the things we collectively learned:

Many of the challenges that the groups we worked with in this project faced, are not so different from the challenges that groups looking after historic faith buildings are facing; such as lack of time, lack of resources and lack of confidence in their own ability to lead change. But what we are seeing, time and again, is that with little support and encouragement, and by creating the space and time for reflection and mutual learning, community groups can achieve wonderful things benefitting their places and the people who inhabit them. Engaging in civic action projects can enhance people's skills, confidence and wellbeing and can help create and strengthen social relationships, culture and people's sense of identity. Projects that are rooted in communities and which also truly build on collaboration and partnership working, can help create more just and more sustainable environments.

As part of the ICL project, we went back to two groups that we worked with in Empowering Design Practices, to capture and celebrate their own journeys and to provide some inspiration for anyone considering a community-led civic action project. Enjoy the stories of Cemetery Road Baptist Church and the ISRAAC Somali Community Association, located within a small distance from each other, on Cemetery Road in Sheffield.

Post by Becky Payne

Since July 2020, I have been part of the Centre for the Study of Christianity and Culture, York University research team looking at the impact of Covid-19 on churches. The other partner organisations were Historic England, the Association of English Cathedrals, the Church of England, the Historic Religious Buildings Alliance and the National Churches Trust.
 
One of the main catalysts for this research project was the decision to close places of worship during the 1st lockdown in March 2020. While acknowledging that these were early days in our understanding of Covid-19 and quick decisions had to be made, it came as a shock to many people that churches were going to close – the first time since the 13th century. And as time went on, there was also a feeling that this period of closure might mean that understanding the importance and significance of the buildings themselves could become diluted as activities including worship increasingly moved online.
 
Even so, until we started work, we had no idea of the impact that three months closure would have on so many people and for so many different reasons.
 
More than 5,500 people, made up of non-church members, congregations and church leaders, took part in surveys and interviews between August and December 2020 and in February and March 2021, providing testimony and data on the human cost of the pandemic when places of worship were closed and unable to play their usual role as crisis centres, community hubs and places of comfort in times of national need and anxiety. Many people spoke of how they missed having access to church buildings where they felt safe to mourn, find respite in beauty, and seek peace. For many, key was that these buildings represent continuity with previous generations, that the often historic architecture creates a feeling of stability and survival, but also that ‘the building speaks to you and you can feel a lot of good energy from prayers that has been going on for years’.
 
One of the very striking aspect of our findings is how strongly non-church members reacted to the closure of buildings. We had so many responses from across all social groups reporting on the impact of activities that couldn’t take place and the resulting increase in isolation and need at a time of major suffering. For instance, 75% of non-church members said they wanted access to churches as places of quiet reflection and comfort. 
 Dr Dee Dyas, the project lead says that: “if there was one clear message from non-church people it is summed up in this quote from the respondent who said: 'These places must remain open. They are essential to the community … especially for times such as this’."
 
We also found so much that was positive. Despite the restrictions of necessary COVID-19 regulations, the responses showed that churches still managed to have a presence through online engagement, hosting foodbanks and other practical help, including more recently working with the NHS as vaccination and testing centres.

Many churches were amazing in their practical creativity, finding ways to continue to support the most vulnerable in our communities. Moving worship and support groups online, phoning, producing family activity packs, producing 1,000s of meals and delivering them, visiting with shopping, opening up churchyards (once allowed) for activities, organising nativity trails in local shops and taking carol singing to the streets. The list is amazing and inspiring.
 
Many existing partnerships were strengthened such as with local schools and new ones were formed during this time bringing places of worship together with other local charities, hubs and parish councils, local authorities to help those who have been affected by this dreadful virus.
 
What it has also shown is how vital places of worship are in their role of providing support emergency social care, mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual wellbeing, and other community benefits. The National Churches Trust’s House of Good Report showed how much churches were doing prior to March 2020, and this report shows how much continued during the last 15 months despite the epidemic.
 
Recognition of this has meant that many churches saw new people coming to volunteer and/or give donations of food and money because they saw ‘what you are doing’ and appreciated churches as a trusted channel for supporting communities.
 
The findings of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Faith and Society’s 'Keeping the Faith' report, highlighted the positive experience of partnership working between local authorities and multiple faith groups, especially churches, during the pandemic. ‘The aspects particularly mentioned by local authorities were faith groups’ ability to add value to partnerships through their longstanding presence in local communities, their ability to access hard to reach groups, providing a pool of volunteer resources, and acting as a source of local leadership.’
 
Many of the church leaders, we heard from, have already identified areas of increased need and new needs within their community and are already making plans on how to meet them. Common keys areas are around mental health, debt and food poverty.
 
What we found, all shows the potential of local places of worship for people of all faiths and none to play a key role in the recovery of communities. As the report says, ‘they can act as symbols of their community’s long-term survival while serving as local hubs for social care, practical support and centres for a wide range of activities which deliver community cohesion and stronger communities’.
 
As one church leader, based in one of the most deprived parishes in the country, said ‘We know that the impact of what has happened is going to roll on for years, and it's going to affect our communities and the people we know, massively. We're going to be picking up a lot of the pieces for ages. And it might just feel like it’s been forgotten. But, it’s those organisations that are on the ground, like churches, that see people face-to-face all the time, and people will still come for support and will still need food and our parish church is committed to the community always.

The report strongly recommends that this summer is used as a time for consultation with grassroots practitioners and communication of the latest scientific guidance, so churches can stay open safely and maximise their contribution to recovery and wellbeing, even in the event of further waves of virus transmission. 
 
You can read the whole report here https://churchesandcovid.org/report

References
House of Good: research looking into the social and economic benefits that churches provide to local communities and to the UK more generally, National Churches Trust, October 2020. https://www.houseofgood.nationalchurchestrust.org/ 

Faith and Society: Keeping the Faith Partnerships between faith groups and local authorities The All Party Parliamentary Group on Faith and Society, November 2020.
https://www.faithandsociety.org/news/2021/02/recent-appg-report-and-faith-covenant-both-endorsed-in-parliamentary-debate/ 

Becky Payne is a freelance consultant and Development Officer at the Historic Religious Buildings Alliance (Heritage Alliance).

Post by Becky Payne

A big part of our work in EDP has been to research completed cases of repairs and adaptations to historic faith buildings and identify key themes and tales of caution and inspiration. The two documents prepared by Becky Payne below present the cases of Saint Thomas, Pear Street in Derby and  Saints Peter, Paul & Philomena in Merseyside.

St Thomas, Pear Street, Derby
This was a grade II church which prior to 2011 was facing permanent closure owing to the dwindling congregation and a building with very serious repairs issues. A new incumbent grasped a vision of rescuing St Thomas’ Church and bringing it back as a place of worship and a centre for community outreach in a deprived area of Derby. How they approached their engagement with the local community was imaginative and inspiring. They have achieved so much, but it has already taken 9 years and they are still working on it. 

Download the short case study

Ss. Peter, Paul & Philomena, New Brighton, Merseyside
This church is known as the ‘Dome of Home’ given its nickname by seamen returning to Liverpool during the Second World War who when, they saw its striking copper dome from the Mersey, knew they had reached home. Closed in 2008 when the building had fallen into severe disrepair, it started its journey to full restoration and re-opening as a place of worship, when the Roman Catholic Diocese of Shrewsbury set up a full repair lease with The Institute of Christ the King in 2011, to reopen the church as a Roman Catholic Shrine.  It has taken 9 years, and 4 grants from the National Lottery Heritage Fund to achieve this and importantly the leadership of one determined woman who has led a team of volunteers through the development and implementation of a range of community engagement and activities.

Download the short case study

post by Sophia de Sousa and Katerina Alexiou

On 12 February, 2020, The Empowering Design Practices research team gathered with partners and community collaborators, colleagues, funders and friends to celebrate five years of research exploring community leadership in design within the context of historic places of worship. This was a day to share learning and the resources produced by the research team, to celebrate community achievements and to explore the potential, opportunities and challenges that these buildings, and their custodians, face in providing welcoming spaces for their whole community.

The project's celebratory conference and exhibition, Empowering Design Practices LIVE was held at St Paul's in Hammersmith, a wonderful example of a church that has reinvented itself and transformed its building and offer to the community. The event was a wonderful opportunity to bring together the wide range of people and organisations that engaged with the project to reflect on work we have done together and to generate ideas and propositions for the future.

The day kicked off with an overview of the project and our key learning points and recommendations, based on our experience of collaborating with over 50 places of worship around the country, as well as professionals and support bodies that work with them. This was a moment to reflect on the specialness of historic places of worship as buildings, and on the custodians tasked with looking after and unleashing the potential in these buildings. Through a design lens, we explored how community leadership, partnership working and effective community engagement can help ensure the long-term sustainability of these buildings, and help support local networks, community development and the life and vibrancy of these much-valued sacred heritage buildings.   

The morning also included a panel discussion of various partners briefly sharing their key reflections and learning points, from the perspective of the organisations and sectors they represent. A key message that came through, articulated brilliantly by Historic England’s Head of Places of Worship and Owners Advice, Diana Evans, was that engagement in design is important, it requires support and capacity building, but it can also be great fun, a space to build confidence and a frame in which important connections, friendships and partnerships can be formed. 

The rest of the day included both panel discussions  and interactive workshop sessions.

Our first panel of invited speakers was made up of representatives of community-led design projects at various points on their journey. Revd Canon Caroline Dick and Churchwarden David Wilcox from St Michael and All Angels, Whitton Gilbert spoke about their Breathing Space project, and the importance of a vision being greater than simply the reordering of the church. They stressed the importance of talking to people, and bringing them with you on a journey to which each person and organisation can contribute in their own way. 

Revd Simon Lockett from St Peter’s Church, Peterchurch spoke of the need to form partnerships, and the importance of being willing to experiment and if necessary, to change direction of travel in response to changing circumstances. He stressed the importance of high quality and values-driven design, and that this can be achieved with varying budgets. 

Revd Geoffrey Eze from All Saints Church, Hanley spoke of the creation of a new enclosed space within their church, and the importance of changes to a building being catalytic, enabling new partnerships and new ways to serve the community as well as the congregation. 

And finally, Adam Yusuf, Chair of Israac Somali Community Association in Sheffield, spoke of the group’s collaboration with the EDP research project, and with The University of Sheffield. These helped grow the e group’s awareness and appreciation for their building as an entity with its own history and identity, and realise the role that design can play in creating opportunities for the building to serve their community objectives. He also spoke of the importance of connecting with other groups taking on similar projects to transform their buildings, and how much they could learn from each other.  

Our panel of professional speakers was tasked with presenting brief provocations from the perspective of an architect, a support officer and a researcher, which then led us into a plenary discussion with the room. 

Some challenging questions and propositions were put to the room: Aidan Potter, Partner at John McAslan Architects quoted Jane Jacobs’ famous words, “Old buildings need new ideas” and challenged the room to be bold in our thinking about what is possible in places of worship. He also reminded us that the design for these buildings has to be a collective endeavour, with the architect simply one element of a complex and collaborative design process. Architect and researcher Nevine Nasser spoke of the relationship between sacred space and sacred experience, and reminded us that faith buildings must integrate into the society that surrounds them. Perhaps the most challenging provocation came from Wendy Coombey, Community Partnership & Development Officer at the Diocese of Hereford, who reminded us that these buildings must be at the service of people, and not the other way around. She asked what would happen if the custodians of these complex listed buildings facing the challenge of innovation and sustainability, simply decided to give the buildings back and opt for alternative spaces to gather and worship.

The exhibition offered a snapshot of the project, with key information and statistics about the activities and groups with which we have collaborated. It also included a section which introduced the wide spectrum of practical resources developed throughout the project and artefacts from public engagement  activities and live student projects. The resources on offer for people to explore and take away included interactive websites Explore Design: community buildings, A Design Thinking Guide, as well as freely downloadable materials such as our Design Project Stories and our series of Designing Places with People booklets, on engaging communities in the design process. The exhibition also introduced emerging resources on working with architects, key topics for consideration when setting off on a project to transform a place of worship, and an online course on community leadership in design. 

We also shared a series of films produced within the project, which include inspiring stories of community engagement in design, a practical resource on using digital media as a design engagement tool, and films capturing our Design Training, a workshop on developing a shared purpose, and related projects Prototyping Utopias and Tate Exchange.

Finally, the exhibition space included a policy corner which invited participants to record thoughts and recommendations about four key questions. Here is a small taster of the ideas that emerged:

How do we connect heritage buildings with the broader context of placemaking? 

• Build links with wider, existing place making strategies locally and nationally to create a cohesive approach. 
• Identify within local planning policy that S106 (CIL) can go towards the reuse of heritage buildings for community/ services/ etc. 

How do we champion and enable community engagement in design decision-making? 

• By showing the local community that changing our buildings will lead to more meaningful resources for the community. 
• By funders encouraging this approach as a precursor to investment, to secure more sustainable projects. A release of funds for project development? 
• By ensuring that they are engaged in the process from the start and listening to them. Solutions shouldn’t be imposed in a top-down approach. ​

How do we raise awareness of the value of historic places of worship in the local economy/ society? 

• Collect feedback from community users and congregations, encourage councils to read it! 
• By not holding up historic places simply as places of beauty but also as useful spaces that can benefit the local community. ​

How do we build capacity for community leadership in the design and adaptation of places of worship? 

• Partnerships with local government and councils for voluntary services.
• Training faith leaders. Central web-based resources, including a list of faith leaders willing to advise others. 
• If owners + funders realised a vital first step was capacity building (if assets are to be protected) they would prioritise this as a first step. You wouldn’t build a house without paying for a land survey first. 

The event offered opportunities for people to engage practically with some of the project’s methods aiming to facilitate collaborative exploration of issues and ideas and the generation of ideas for future actions.

The first workshop of the day (which ran in parallel to the community presentations) brought people together to explore the challenges, assets and opportunities that arise in the efforts to unlock and enhance the potential of historic religious buildings as places of community value. Participants worked in groups to map and connect their ideas about the barriers they face, but also the assets they have (their skills, resources, support) and to collectively come up with suggestions for future actions or processes. Here are some of their suggestions:

• Feeding grassroots knowledge (and longevity and connections) of faith buildings to governance - spreading awareness of Taylor Report
• Creatively connecting communities to construct and share knowledge and ownership 
• Investigate partnerships with local agencies, local councillors, voluntary organisations, local groups and local activities
• Build networks
• Challenge the church establishment to be more radical about what churches can be

The final activity of the day brought everybody together to co-create ideas for possible future collaborations, actions, projects or networks. This ‘cross-pollination’ workshop focused in particular on exploring ways to enable custodians of places of worship to shape the future of their buildings, and the suggestions generated during the morning workshop were brought to bear on people’s thinking. Participants put on the table their resources, current projects and aspirations and explored synergies, connections and new ideas. A champion from each table then moved around to other tables to pitch their ideas and garner further support. At the end of a long day, it was heartening to see the unwilting enthusiasm with which everyone continued to share their knowledge, experience and goodwill to help build capacity in community-led design and support and strengthen communities around historic places of worship.

We would like to thank everyone who attended the day, and shared their stories, reflections and ideas for the future. It is clear that there was fantastic energy and momentum in the room, and that there is much we can do together looking forward.

by Dr Katerina Alexiou

One of the instruments the EDP project had anticipated using to explore certain research questions and generate ideas for future steps was that of the design studio. A design studio is typically a space for collaborative enquiry where participants go through a learning journey together by engaging in creative design activities.
 
In May we held our first design studio to explore Live Projects. Live Projects are educational initiatives in which university students work on real practical projects for a designated period of time as part of their study. By the time of our design studio, the EDP project had already supported five different Live Projects with historic places of worship in collaboration with the University of Sheffield School of Architecture and University College London (UCL) and so this was a good stage to pause for reflection. We also wanted to open up the conversation with other initiatives from other universities and provide a creative space to share and discuss Live Project experiences from various perspectives (academics, community members, students and practitioners), and take stock of the future of this type of activity.
 
There is already a lot of literature around the value of Live Projects for students, establishing, for example, how they help them gain practical experience and build important skills in project management, communication and team working. Live projects also have a social value and as our project’s emphasis is on community-led design, we were also interested to focus on the collaborative working process and particularly to explore the impact Live Projects have on participating communities.
 
The design studio took place at St Luke’s Community Centre in London and brought together some leading Live Project initiatives in architecture across the UK, from the University of Sheffield, the University of West of England, Cardiff University, University of Nottingham, London Metropolitan University and UCL. We also had community representatives from Bow Church in London, Cemetery Road Baptist Church in Sheffield, Brandon Trust in Bristol, and Grange Pavilion in Cardiff, as well as students who worked with them, and other communities not present in the room, such as ISRAAC Somali Community Association in Sheffield, St Peter’s Church in Chester, St Peter’s Church Congleton and a built project in South Africa.
 
In the first part of the day, each live project group was paired with another to share their experiences and discuss key features of their projects, but also key challenges they encountered and things that were important to their success. The task of each grouping was to use various crafts materials provided to create a shared representation of those key aspects. 

The discussions and the activity helped unearth the different contexts and commonalities and variations between projects, in terms of people involved, skills and resources mobilised, and processes and materials used. For example there were notable variations in terms of size, duration and intensity of projects, with some lasting over a few weeks, others spread over a year or a number of years. The type of projects varied as well, from single student projects, to group projects ranging from 4 to 30 students. There were also different ways in which universities and students engaged with community groups, some to define project briefs or to deliver activities on the ground, with different accompanying mechanisms of support and roles played by different actors in the process.
 
The session concluded with a plenary discussion on the benefits of live projects for communities, which brought out some important points about the significance and value of live projects. Here are some key points:

• The energy and enthusiasm of students is an asset. Live projects bring in inspiration and can help communities/clients consider a wider spectrum of opportunities and ideas for a place.
• Live projects provide a space for enquiry and reflection and can help articulate the needs and specialness of a particular context.
  
• The live project activity can help build momentum, and be a catalyst for change.
• The value of live projects rests more in the process rather than the product (the outcomes). They promote mutual learning and help build infrastructures and a community's capacity and confidence to deliver projects.

 
The second part of the day focused on future opportunities. This time participants reflected from their unique position as students, community representatives or academics, to identify ideas for activities or resources that can promote or improve live projects in the future. These ranged from good practice guidelines on how to develop collaborative briefs for live projects, to ideas for the development of new tools and resources (such as an app for aiding communication), to more strategic objectives such as setting up a live projects network and promoting further collaboration across institutions and sectors.
 
The EDP project has set an objective to further explore the mechanisms and potential of live projects as vehicles of empowerment, so we hope to follow up some of these actions within the realm of EDP. In the short term, we are supporting two more Live Projects this year in collaboration with our partners at the Sheffield School of Architecture. For now, I will close the blog with a huge thanks to everyone who took part in the design studio for being so generous with their time and knowledge. 

post by Katerina Alexiou

Last year, members of the EDP team took part in the AHRC's 2016 Connected Communities Research Festival, which was focused on the theme of Community Futures and Utopias, celebrating 500 years from Thomas More’s publication.

The Prototyping Utopias project, led by EDP partners The Open University and The Glass-House Community Led Design, built on our relationship with Bow Church and connections with other local organisations in Bow: Bow Arts, Bromley by Bow Centre and Poplar HARCA. The project was partly an experimentation on how a historic place of worship can be used to catalyse connections in the wider community, but it had a broader objective to explore community utopias, and how the connections people have in their own places frame their future aspirations and can lead to the emergence of new visions and actions.
 
We were fortunate to also collaborate with three artists who have lived and worked in the area, Paul Burgess, Emma Crouch and Simon Daw. Outputs from the activities were shared at a major public exhibition, the Utopia Fair at Somerset House in central London, between 24th and 26th June 2016.
 
Following the Fair, I was involved in an AHRC catalyst fund application led by Deirdre Figueiredo, Director of Craftspace, which brought together three projects present at the Fair: Maker-Centric, Life Chances and our own Prototyping Utopias.
 
At the end of June we all met in Soho House (former home of the manufacturer Matthew Boulton) in Birmingham, to talk about and experience each other's projects; share the theoretical concepts we used to approach the theme of community utopias and the processes we used to engage people from local communities; and explore the outputs and learning produced. 

It was a constructive and rich experience and I took away several observations and ideas for further exploration. Here are some key summarising points:
 
We approached the subject of utopia from different disciplinary starting points or lenses. The Maker-Centric project saw utopia through the lens of heritage and embarked on exploring the past as a catalyst for future thinking. The Prototyping Utopias project used the lens of design, and explored how dreaming can help explore and develop ideas for future realities. Life Chances saw utopia from a social science perspective and used creative disruption as a vehicle for creating novel futures.
 
Despite those different starting points there were many commonalities between the projects. They all saw the past as a foundation but also limitation for the future, which necessitated an effort to re-examine, re-construct and to a certain extent let free of the past. They all paid particular attention to place and the specificity of the local context in which project activities were carried out. They all also focussed methodologically on making and acting, as vehicles for helping engage people from diverse communities in utopian thinking.
 
It was also interesting to see the different configurations of working between academics, practitioners, artists and community participants adopted in each case, all however agreeing on the benefits of collaboration in research, design, and action, and the richness of knowledge and outputs resulting from the process.
 
For me, the most affecting aspect of this exploration of community utopias was exactly the emotional engagement of people with this question and the realisation that we dream the same dreams of peace, equality, diversity, opportunity and respect for each other and for the planet. But we all strive to realise them differently in our locations and contexts through, mostly, small steps.

post by Becky Payne

Three of us went to visit St John the Baptist at Stadhampton on Saturday 15th October. I was especially pleased as I had last visited St John’s in 2013 when the builders were still in situ, scaffolding was still up in the nave and the cement was still wet in the arch leading into the new toilets. It was a project I was very interested in as it is one of a few villages setting up an arrangement whereby the Parochial Church Council (PCC) and the village share the responsibility of looking after and managing their church building.  

It was great to see it two years on – the buildings work finished and the building being used by both the congregation and the community. Absolutely a win-win for both village and church.

Stadhampton, a small village of 800 had really been lacking a community space since the 1960s when the old hall had burnt done.  They had been using the school hall but this was only available outside school use and was becoming less available as the school increased in size. There had been talk of the need for a village hall for several years and a committee set up who looked at various options including new build. At the same time, the church had a very small congregation, was in need of major repairs as well as being cold and damp and having no main drainage. So the PCC was very pleased when they were approached by the Village Hall Committee with the suggestion of using the church.
​
It cost just under £400k and took about 5 years and the church is now repaired, refurbished and is on main drainage. There are two toilets in an extension to the west end, and a fully equipped kitchen and serving area in the north aisle. The pews have gone and have been replaced by comfortable chairs. There is a retractable screen which can be lowered for the Film Club and then disappears entirely restoring the east end to how it has always looked. The base of the tower has been refurbished with modern storage cupboards and is now a comfortable vestry. The restoration of the beamed ceiling, the cleaning of the stonework, the careful design of the wooden panels around the kitchen and the new floor has created a very beautiful and calming space.

But as we know and as was emphasised by the project chair and champion, it is much more than the bricks and mortar, it is about the people.  And we were met by a group of 16 people – the largest group of people that have attended one of these workshops and welcomed into a warm and comfortable building, but one that has retained a very special feeling and one that is still very much a church.
​
Like all similar projects, it was a challenging 5 years with moments of despair as well as celebration, but the testament of its success was those 16 people, some who had been part of the original building committee, and some – which bodes well for the future - people who have joined since completion because they wanted to come and help manage the new building. They all obviously love the space they have created and are quite rightly proud of what they now have.

Looking back during the mapping exercise, they came up with plenty of top tips especially around funding, but also about the importance of continuing to keep checking that people are ‘on side’. What came through loud and clear was that ‘you need champions’ which on one level is about having a supportive bishop (which in their diocese, they do!) but also that any project of this complexity needs its own champion – the person who keeps it going, not just the co-ordination, but who keeps on pushing on through the setbacks and unforeseen problems and also manages to inspire others to keep on too. It was so clear that this person had been Ann Stead the Chair of the Building Committee who had fulfilled that role and was indeed still fulfilling that role! One of her top tips was that you need to keep hold of a clear vision and narrative which is one that you can articulate to funders, the community, the congregation as well as it being your own inspiration when things appear overwhelming.

Most telling for me was a member of the congregation who said that although she had been fully behind the plans from the beginning she was happy to find that the refurbished building remained very much a church. From a more personal perspective, she said that she had been worried about retiring and feared that she might become isolated. In fact, the new activities which were happening as a result of the new community space, had meant that she had plenty to do and meeting people was not an issue. Similarly, another volunteer said that she had been considering leaving the village as it was so difficult to meet people. Inspired by the project, she had volunteered to be on the management committee and the village had become home again.

Seeing photographs of the pews that had previously filled the nave, we saw during the workshop what a flexible space it has become. For the morning session we sat in a circle of chairs, and at lunchtime, three tables suddenly appeared and were arranged down the length of the nave covered in white table cloths and we ate delicious soup, bread and cake properly sitting down and then for the afternoon, those tables were rearranged to become space for the project timeline exercise.
​
The key for me was that just before I left, I looked back at the chancel and the screen had disappeared, the kitchen area was all clean and tidied up and all the chairs and tables had been put away except for two rows of chairs facing the altar all set up ready for the Sunday service the next morning. A truly shared space and does it matter that some people call it the church and some call it the hall? No, because it is fulfilling both roles perfectly. 

post by Katerina Alexiou

In the last few months we have been in contact with the Baroness Warsi Foundation to explore synergies between our projects and the potential to share and disseminate learning.
 
The Baroness Warsi Foundation’s ‘Modern Places of Worship’ project, explores the interplay between architecture, faith and identity from both an historic and a modern perspective.  The Foundation is hosting a series of ten UK-wide debates, and aims to publish a report and launch an architectural design competition.
 
Drawing on our common interest on exploring the relationship between places of worship and local communities we decided to partner on a debate on “Shared spaces: the modern place of worship”. The debate is focussed on exploring the potential for places of worship to be shared, by different faith groups, by the wider community, and for mixed uses. It is held on the 25th of November, 3:00-5:00 at Liverpool School of Architecture.
 
The connection between people and their place of worship, and between a place of worship and the wider community around it, is layered with complex connotations, interpretations and feelings. Places of worship are fundamental to faith communities, providing a physical space to practice their faith and to come together. Bricks and mortar take on spiritual and faith values. For others, a place of worship may feel out of their reach or disconnected from their local community. What happens when those places of worship become shared spaces?

• Is the form, feeling and function of a building defined by the particular faith practiced there?
• How do different faith groups perceive other places of worship and can different faiths come together in shared buildings?
• Can a faith building accommodate local community activities and services while maintaining its integrity and function as a place of worship?

 
This free debate will consider these questions starting with a series of provocations from a panel of speakers that bring a diverse range of experience and insights into the topic:

• Dr. Andrew Crompton, Head of the School of Architecture, University of Liverpool
• Daniel Leon & Matthew Lloyd, two of the architects behind the tri-faith prayer space, the Friday, Saturday, Sunday project
• The Archbishop of Liverpool, the Most Revd Malcolm McMahon OP
• Sophia de Sousa, Empowering Design Practices project research team & Chief Executive, The Glass-House Community Led Design.

 
The debate will be chaired by Lord Alton of Liverpool.
 
The event is open to anyone interested in exploring the future of places of worship and their place in our communities.
 
Click here to register

post by Sophia de Sousa, The Glass-House Community Led Design

One of the elements of our Empowering Design Practices project is to visit places of worship that have made physical changes to their building, and to speak to those involved about the process and impact of those changes. We want to learn from their experience to help others, and to consider the roles of design and community in their success.
 
Tucked away in Witton Gilbert, a village outside Durham, is the beautiful parish church of St Michael and All Angels, which has stood there for over 800 years. It sits surrounded by natural beauty, with a churchyard bordering on Witton Dean, parkland that rises from the river below. 

Like many rural parish churches, St Michael and All Angels, has undergone a series of changes to the building over time. What stands there today, though clearly a historic place of worship, is not simply a building frozen in a particular moment in time in the past. Many generations have used the building, made changes to it and done their best to make it respond their needs and to reflect their approach to worship.
 
A clear vision
The success of the recent reordering at St Michael’s is rooted in a clear vision, strong leadership and collaboration from both the faith and lay communities. Their vision, for a quiet Breathing Space, a project to help people find health and well-being, emerged from an open and frank conversation about what and whom the building is for. The starting point was firmly rooted in an understanding of what that particular church and its context have to offer, what makes the place special.

What is so thrilling about St Michael's is that the changes that they have made to their building have been done with such care and attention to detail. They demonstrate design responding cleverly to the values and needs of its congregation while providing new opportunities for their wider community use.
 
Good design matters
St Michael's wanted to make physical changes to their building which are not uncommon in reordering projects. They wanted to improve accessibility, create a more flexible gathering space, and make the building more comfortable and welcoming with the addition of toilet and kitchen facilities. The launch of the Breathing Space project gave both motivation and opportunity to make those changes happen.
 
The clever expansion to either side of the existing porch, completed in December 2012, created significant extra space for a toilet, office, and utility storage cupboard. The stone used on the extension was sourced (from an old ice cream parlour in Sheffield) to blend seamlessly into the existing stonework.

​The conversion of part of the vestry into a kitchen, with a serving hatch through to the side aisle, and the creation of loft storage space, tackled some challenging design questions about balancing the practical with respect for the faith practices and heritage of the building.

The kitchen hatch provides a practical link through to the side aisle, where pews were removed to create a flexible space for activities. The congregation, which is thriving at St Michael’s, were keen not to lose seating space for their services, so high quality foldable chairs were purchased to provide both seating for services, and flexible arrangement of seating for a range of activities in the aisle.
 
Top tips
We are grateful to the Revd Canon Caroline Dick and all of those at St Michael and All Angels, who so generously shared their story and what they had learned along the way. The tips they had for those embarking on a similar project were many. Here are just a few.
​

• Think big vision to get the small things done
• Think in phases, and use your vision to support small steps.
• Reach out and build partnerships.
• Get your most vociferous opponents involved, help them understand your position and give them a voice in decision-making
• Acknowledge and thank people for their contribution

Reposted from the Glass-House blog (2 August 2016)

post by Katerina Alexiou

In the first year of the EDP project we focussed on understanding and collecting examples of good practice in the development of historic places of worship to meet wider community needs. Much of our activity was focussed on visiting past projects and reflecting on the process with those that saw projects through. In November 2015 we also held a focus group with people who provide professional advice and support, particularly officers working for Historic England and project architects. We wanted to get their perspective on the challenges in current practice and examine existing as well new resources and ways in which these challenges can be overcome.
 
We were fortunate to have 15 participants, with a variety of educational and professional backgrounds and an admirable insight and willingness to share their experiences.

Identifying and dealing with challenges
In the first part of the workshop we started with mapping recurring challenges along a timeline, starting with the stages of exploration and visioning, through to development and delivery of plans for adapting historic places of worship. We asked participants to reflect on practical challenges from different perspectives (architectural, faith, heritage and community), always thinking about the particularities of engaging with and serving community needs. The emphasis in the discussion was on Church buildings due to the participants’ experiences, but most of the challenges and themes identified are relevant to different faith buildings and projects.

One of the key challenges identified, particularly important in the initial phases of design, was the relation between church and wider community, and the lack of engagement with one another.  Local communities are often unaware of plans or activities carried out by local places of worship, or are reluctant to engage because of the faith element. Similarly, the worshipping community may find themselves divided between the mission of their faith (and building) and secular needs. In fact this challenge seems to be tightly associated with the existence of multiple attitudes relating to faith, heritage and community. Participants for example mentioned conflicts between heritage and conservation values and the values of a worshipping community, with cases were external communities are interested in preserving the building and historical fixtures and fittings more than the congregation. Similarly there were reported conflicts between ‘old’ and ‘new’ perceptions of spirituality, or ‘old’ and ‘new’ perceptions of heritage. However, lack of engagement may also come because of lack of knowledge of how to engage others in the process. Lack of capacity was another key grand challenge. This includes lack of knowledge of the planning process, terminology (jargon) and skills for project management. To lack of knowledge, it is important to also add lack of time, people resources (beyond the ‘usual suspects’) and lack of funding (especially for visioning and development). Returning to the issue of community engagement, participants also pointed out the lack of community auditing, understanding who the stakeholders are, what their needs are, and what their assets are. A lack of clear statement of need and shared vision is one of the key barriers many projects face and this is something we ourselves are discovering in the new projects we work with. In addition to these challenges, in the later phases of the process, many participants also mentioned the slow pace of the process and the difficulty of maintaining drive and commitment over a long period.
 
But we did not only stay at describing the challenges. Our participants suggested many useful ideas and strategies for overcoming those challenges. Some of the key suggestions were:

• Provide support with the formation of statements of need and significance (e.g. through workshops or sharing of existing resources)
• Develop a community engagement training exercise to identify and define stakeholders
• Provide training on project management (managing budgets, people) and fundraising
• Encourage networking and social events to learn together
• Invert power of Dioceses to empower individual PCCs
• Bring together client committee members, planning officers, DAC officers, architect to discuss ideas and plans
• Develop materials to elucidate the process and jargon
• Provide state funding for preventative maintenance
• Provide funding to make a start

Identify knowledge, resources and training materials for professionals
The second part of the workshop focussed on the knowledge, resources and materials that would be useful for professionals working in the field. Our aim in the EDP project is not only to support groups to lead the development of their places, but also to support those who support them, and provide open training materials to budding architects, designers, and community and building development professionals. The responses can be sorted into two categories: domain specific/local knowledge and key generic skills. The table below summarises some of the key ideas.

Although there are differences between the architects and the support officers, we can identify some common themes. Domain-specific knowledge (e.g. liturgy, history of faiths and faith buildings, terminology, planning process, conservation etc) was seen as a great barrier, the discussion revealed the existence of a wealth of resources that can be consulted. This includes for example the websites of the Princes Regeneration Trust, the National Churches Trust, SPAB and the Maintenance Co-ops project, ChurchCare and Churches Conservation Trust. The EDP team is in the process of collating existing resources together and making them available on the website. See our Resources page.
 
When it comes to skills, there was a significant emphasis on collaborative skills (motivating, engaging, working with, managing others) but critical skills were also important (e.g. researching the community and the history of the place). Creative skills were important too although more implicit perhaps in discussions about methods and processes to help engage with the community, and support collective visioning.

We are grateful for all these discussions and we are planning to carry out more focus groups with experts providing advice and support to places of worship.

All these ideas and observations are making their way into the development of our educational programme, which includes the delivery of a two-day training course for professionals next year, as well as the creation of resources to be delivered through an online open educational platform.