[Previous] [Contents] [Next]

Towards Community Learning Plans

6 Summary of conclusions and recommendations

The key strengths, issues, and recommendations identified by HM Inspectors are shown in the text in bold. They are gathered together in this section, with some rewording for convenience of reference.

6.1 Current strengths

• 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.
• Some local authorities had established effective linkage between community plans and CLPs.
• In some areas, benefits were gained when authorities integrated community learning partnerships into other planning structures, such as social inclusion partnerships.
• Strong support from the Chief Executive and/or senior authority managers was a very positive factor in promoting a corporate approach to development of the community learning strategy and community learning plans.
• Lead officers with dedicated time were a crucial factor in effective planning and co-ordination of community learning strategies and plans.
• Most new community schools located in CLP areas played a positive role in partnerships.

6.2 Issues for consideration

• 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.
• 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.
• A positive relationship between community planning and community learning plans was inhibited by the slow pace of development of one or both initiatives in most authorities.
• In some cases, local authorities and planning groups had difficulties motivating partners to be involved and to maintain a high level of commitment.
• 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.
• There was as yet little evidence of resources being re-targeted to address assessed learning needs, or of impact of the planning process on learning opportunities.
• Many partners perceived the lack of dedicated additional resources to co-ordinate CLPs and to meet the emerging learning needs of communities as detrimental to the success of the initiative.

6.3 Recommendations

• Local authorities should set firm timescales for the completion and implementation of community learning plans.
• Local authorities should ensure appropriate linkage between community learning plans and community plans.
• Local authorities should take steps to communicate the purpose of partnerships and the CLP effectively to other council services, external organisations and the local community.
• Partnerships should ensure that their needs assessment and consultation activities focus on key priorities and fully involve the community.
• Planners should consider carefully the achievability of objectives and targets and express them in terms consistent with measurement of outputs and outcomes.
• Authorities should support partnerships in taking steps to include important services such as social work and schools as members.

[Previous] [Contents] [Next]