4.1 Assessing needs
All partnerships had carried out some form of audit of current provision of community learning and development within their area. In some partnerships, the exercise was thorough and comprehensive and provided a valuable planning resource. Other partnerships had carried out a wide-ranging audit, but there was no clear relationship between the breadth of data collected and national priorities.
Processes for assessing community learning needs were fair overall. Almost all partnerships had used one or more methods including surveys, questionnaires, open days, door-to-door interviews or focus groups. Some of these activities were very time consuming and poorly designed and so were of little value for the purpose of planning. In most cases, needs assessment exercises did not focus sufficiently on the priorities detailed in Circular 4/99. Partnerships varied in the degree to which they involved the community and used available statistical information when assessing community needs. Partnerships should ensure that their needs assessment and consultation activities focus on key priorities and fully involve the community.
4.2 Content of plans
Community learning plans generally focused on themes that reflected Circular 4/99. Most plans aimed to:
The minority of thematic plans included authority-wide plans focusing on alienated young people, ethnic minorities and literacy and numeracy. One of the smallest authorities had developed a thematic plan which focused on family learning, in the wider contexts of increased opportunity to learn, social inclusion, active citizenship and the effective use of partnerships. This plan was notable in that its measures to support and foster learning started with nursery school and extended to lifelong adult learning. The following extract from the plan illustrates this point:
"Family learning embraces a wide range of activities and is concerned with the interests of parents and carers as much as those of children. Importantly, family learning actively involves parents in the education of their children's learning. Through family learning initiatives, parents will have the opportunity to develop confidence and self-esteem. Learning may take the form of individual or peer support, advice and information, group work or community involvement."
The number of objectives in CLPs varied widely, from as few as three upwards. One plan had 20 objectives, all to be achieved in its first year. While all of the objectives were relevant to the focus of the plan, it was questionable whether the timescale was achievable, and whether it would be possible to sustain this intense activity in future years. Planners also varied in the effectiveness with which they wrote objectives and targets. Most plans included workable objectives and targets but others lacked precision and did not lend themselves to measurement. Planners should consider carefully the achievability of objectives and targets and express them in terms consistent with measurement of outputs and outcomes.
4.3 Structure and presentation of plans
Most completed plans were set out clearly and in accessible language. Some were attractively presented. There were good examples of clear targets with associated timescales and performance measures. In most cases, completed plans were accompanied by good background supplements or appendices. These additional materials included the results of audits of provision and needs assessment exercises. HM Inspectors described one good plan as follows:
The plan was well presented and organised. The vision and means to realise it were clearly stated. They were clearly underpinned by a section describing the processes which the partnership undertook in the plan's preparation. An executive summary made the plan very accessible. Targets and timescales were clearly indicated.
However, a number of CLPs had deficiencies in structure and content, including poor explanation and presentation of purposes and the use of jargon.
4.4 Monitoring and evaluation
Almost all authorities reported that they had adopted the LEAP quality framework to evaluate progress in achieving output and outcome targets of their CLPs. However, in general there was limited monitoring and evaluation in this area because plans had not yet impacted on outputs and outcomes.
4.5 Ownership and commitment
A majority of local authority staff and partners were committed to the planning process and had a sense of ownership of the plan. They generally had a clear understanding of the principles of community learning and development and understood the role of community learning partnerships. The planning process had already had positive results in many authorities. Members of partnerships were more aware of each other's work and were collaborating informally, even where CLPs had not been completed.
There were examples of very good partnerships, within which the aims and purposes of community groups were also fully integrated. Some authorities took positive steps to include individuals and community groups in the community learning plan process. In one case:
The authority had produced an informative booklet to raise the awareness of individuals and groups in the community about the CLP and how they could contribute to its development.
However, in other partnerships, community members were unclear of the purpose of the partnership and how it would impact on their community. Other interested parties often had similar limited awareness. Local authorities should take steps to communicate the purpose of partnerships and the CLP effectively to the local community, other council services, and external organisations.
In some cases, partnerships had not established clear purposes or agreed a
common agenda at the outset. The most common reason was that partnership co-ordinators
had devoted insufficient time for members of the partnership to develop a common
understanding of the principles and values underpinning community learning and
to agree a set of goals.
Where partnerships had not agreed purposes, they were proving less effective
and sustainable. In some cases, local authorities and planning groups had
difficulties motivating partners to be involved and to maintain a high level
of commitment. In one such case, attendance at meetings had fallen off and
some partners had replaced their original representatives with relatively junior
members of staff.
In some cases, the resolve of the authority's representatives was the key factor in sustaining commitment. One example, quoted from a representative of a voluntary organisation was, "The CES brings us together when we fall apart".
4.6 Consultation and participation
Most partnerships were committed to consultation with groups and individuals
in the community, both to encourage participation in the planning process and
to assess community learning needs. Partnerships used a range of methods including
surveys and questionnaires, audits of provision, open days and door-to-door
interviews. In some cases, the methods used were staff intensive, such as doorstep
interviews. The quality of the data collected generally did not reflect the
investment of effort. However, there were examples of very good needs assessment
and consultation with the community, including the work of partner organisations.
Some of these cases derived from partners' established practice.
HM Inspectors reported one example:
A local voluntary organisation which provided child care and play had produced a comprehensive and very useful community profile prior to Circular 4/99. The profile was a very good resource which fitted well with the information needed to begin developing the CLP.
Some partnerships had consulted insufficiently with local groups and had made key decisions with little or no community input. In general, the practice of gathering views from the community was much more fully developed than that of involving the community in decision making.