The summary in this chapter is based entirely on the information supplied by authorities in their questionnaire returns in May 2001 and January 2002. The implications of the figures are taken into account in the analysis in later chapters.
All authorities responded to the survey conducted in May 2001, providing information
on proposals for 140 CLPs. In one case, the authority provided a nil return
because it had yet to decide on how it wished to take forward the initiative.
At that stage, 26 plans (18.5%) had been completed by 14 authorities. One plan
was in draft, 21 plans (15%) were on schedule and seven (5%) were behind schedule.
Work had not yet begun or was at a very early stage on the remaining plans.
Twenty-eight authorities had adopted LEAP to evaluate the success of their plans.
One was using LEAP in part, and another used its own quality framework.
Two authorities provided no information on evaluation.
Thirty-one authorities responded to the January 2002 survey, providing information on 213 CLPs. Five of these authorities stated that they would begin work at a later date on an unspecified number of further plans, and this was implied in some other returns.
Most CLPs (77%) were linked to a geographical area within the authority. The other 23% focused on learning provision linked to a particular theme or to the needs of a priority group across a wider area or the entire authority. In one small authority, all four CLPs were thematic, but eight authorities reported no thematic plans. A few authorities indicated that one or more of their area-based CLPs were also thematic in nature.
Four authorities made reference in their responses to the action plans on adult literacy and numeracy that they had prepared in response to SEELLD Circular 1/01. Three of these authorities regarded the action plan as a thematic CLP, and the other considered it as a separate but related development.
The number of CLPs in each authority ranged from two to 18. It was not systematically related to the size of the authority. For example, of two authorities with very similar populations, one was working on two plans and the other on 11. Graph 1 presents a summary of the number of CLPs being developed across all authorities. It takes no account of their populations.
Graph 1: Number of authorities developing particular numbers of CLPs, at January 2002
There is great variation in the current levels of planning activity across authorities. This may be illustrated by setting the number of currently planned CLPs in each authority against its population. A typical result of the calculation represents one CLP for each 10,000-20,000 people but the range is very wide, from below 5000 to well over 100,000. Such figures are highly notional because in some cases the plans, taken together, cover all of the area of the authority but in others they aggregate to only part of it. Even in authorities with comprehensive coverage, the figures do not take account of the different balance of area-based and thematic plans or the scope and detail of individual plans. They are also limited by the small absolute populations of some authorities. Despite such factors, it is clear that authorities have taken very different lines in their approach to the initiative. There is a need for the sharing of information across local authorities on the scale and scope of community learning plans with a view to identifying and building on best practice.
Graph 2 summarises the dates by which authorities intended to complete their CLPs.
Graph 2: Number of authorities setting particular timescales for completion of CLPs
Only 19 authorities had established a firm timetable for completion of the CLPs covered by their returns to HM Inspectorate. This was inconsistent with the recommendation in SOEID Circular 4/99 that community learning strategies should contain such a timescale, with the implication that timescales for CLPs would be in place when the strategies were submitted in March 2000. Local authorities should set firm timescales for the completion and implementation of community learning plans.
The overall pattern of progress at January 2002 is summarised in Graph 3 below.
Graph 3: Summary of reported stage of progress for CLPs, at January 2002
Seventeen authorities had completed 49 plans by January 2002. This was 20% of the 213 CLPs planned by that stage, and represented an increase of 24 from the 25 plans that had been completed by June 2001. The minority of thematic plans were generally proving slower to produce than area-based plans. The pace of development has been slow overall, raising questions about the capacity of all local authorities to complete and implement the number of plans proposed at January 2002.