Contact: Melanie Saunders, education officer (secondary/post16), tel. 01962 846364, e-mail : [email protected]

1 Summary

1.1 This report describes the background and conduct of Local Area Reviews undertaken by Hampshire and the Isle of Wight Learning and Skills Council (LSC) in Hampshire which is divided into four areas. It also provides information on the recommendations of those reviews and on relevant action which has taken place as a response to them.

1.2 The Area Reviews support aim 1 of the Corporate Strategy (maximising life opportunities) and aim 3 (achieving economic prosperity) by supporting the local Learning and Skills Council in carrying out Local Area Reviews (LARs) in order to plan post-16 provision which better serves the needs of learners and employers in Hampshire.

2 The background to Local Area Reviews

2.1 Since its inception as the lead planning and funding body for post-16 education and skills, the LSC has had, as its primary aim, "to raise participation and attainment through high quality education and training that puts learners first." In order to fulfil this national mission, it has been charged with carrying out area reviews in order to "ensure learner, employer and community needs are met, and to improve the choice and quality of post-16 education and skills provision." All reviews are expected to have been completed by 31 March 2005.

2.2 The conduct of Area Reviews is under the control of each local LSC. Hampshire and the Isle of Wight LSC covers the whole county, including the cities of Southampton and Portsmouth. In order to make the reviews of manageable size, and to reflect more closely the travel-to-learn patterns of students, the local LSC has divided the county into four sections. These sections are the Isle of Wight, Portsmouth and South East Hampshire, Southampton and South West Hampshire and Mid and North Hampshire. These regions do not exactly correspond with the LEA area boundaries; for example, Andover is covered by the South West Local Education Office but is included within the Mid and North Hampshire Local Area Review.

2.3 Although the LSC was established to address retention and achievement post-16, the recognition of the fundamental importance of Key Stage 4 achievement on Key Stage 5 recruitment and performance has led to a 14+ focus within LARs. This means that the reviews and their recommendations are of significance to all secondary schools and the County Council as the Local Education Authority.

3 The conduct of reviews

3.1 The three reviews which affect Hampshire were all undertaken in order to achieve the following:

· A curriculum mapping exercise and an exploration of the linkages and match between supply and demand.

· An assessment of the performance of the education and training providers, including learner recruitment, retention and achievement, financial viability and strategic planning.

· A review of the role of employers in the provision of post-16 education and training.

· An assessment of the extent of current, meaningful collaboration between funding bodies and providers .

· Identification of strategic options and timetables for future action.

3.2 In order to achieve these aims, the LSC engaged an independent chairman and established a task group and a data group for each review. The task group was made up of representatives of the LSC, the LEA and Connexions, the principals of all post-16 colleges in the area, two secondary headteachers, the local learning partnership, training and work-based learning providers, employer and voluntary sector representatives. The data group was a smaller representative group supported by information and data specialists from the LEA and LSC.

3.3 Information was gathered through a series of interviews with providers and by requesting and collating statistical information. The information was analysed and reviewed by the data group which drew conclusions about socio-economic and demographic factors within an area against which to assess its educational and training provision and performance.

3.4 Each review resulted in a draft, stage one, report which made recommendations for the area. These reports were shared with the stakeholders of the respective task groups before being finalised. The recommendations of each report were intended to lead to a second phase in which the issues raised would be addressed. The reports on the three Area Reviews which refer to Hampshire county areas are available to Members on request.

3.5 The fact that each review was independently commissioned and conducted by different chairmen has led to three reports which are very different in their responses and recommendations. The LEA had limited involvement in the first review, Portsmouth and South East Hampshire, but more effective joint working on a number of related projects has meant that the involvement of the LEA in the two subsequent reviews has been at an earlier stage and to more effect.

4 Summary of the main findings

4.1 In summarising the findings of the stage one reports for each of the three areas, any which refer solely to either Portsmouth or Southampton or are very specifically aimed at particular colleges have been omitted. Findings which would involve the County Council are:

4.2 Portsmouth and South East Hampshire

· The LSC, in conjunction with Portsmouth and Hampshire LEAs should develop a comprehensive post-14 education and training strategy in which the voice of the learner is heard.

· The proposal for a forum (college principals, headteachers of 11-18 schools and post-16 providers) should feature strongly in stage 2.

· The idea of an overarching provider forum linked to three local consortia should be investigated.

· Improved support mechanisms for the network of private training providers need to be established.

· Work should start on common entry procedures and processes to all post-16 institutions.

· The LSC should consider how best to co-ordinate the provision of adult and community education and adult basic skills.

· Specific Learning Difficulty provision must be incorporated within the recommended partnership structures.

4.3 Southampton and South West Hampshire

· The first three recommendations deal with the commitment of the local LSC to an annual update of the assessments used for the review, discussions with partners on joint developments and the need to draw gaps in provision to the attention of providers.

· The LSC and LEA should form a joint working relationship to improve the effectiveness of policies aimed at raising performance at KS4 and increasing progression into post-16 learning.

· The LSC should discuss with its partners and stakeholders the policies they have in place concerning the availability of vocational programmes and the improvement of 14-19 performance.

· The LSC should work with others to ensure that up-to-date and impartial information, advice and guidance (IAG) on a full range of study and employment opportunities is available to learners from Year 9.

· Discussions should be initiated on the most appropriate and effective forms of staff development and parent education as a means of enhancing suitable progression, especially at ages 14, 16 and 18.

· The capacity of providers to make decisions based on information about need and demand should be enhanced. The LSC should encourage and facilitate provider co-operation where this enhances student choice and programme viability and broker employer engagement in curriculum development.

· A full range of source data should be available to providers and web-sites should provide detailed information on adult learning opportunities.

· Stage 2 should examine the possibilities of curriculum co-operation between colleges, schools and work-based learning providers and the LSC should encourage discussion concerning student migration with a view to identifying gaps.

· As part of stage 2 the LSC should commission an independent review of the work of the Eastleigh Consortium and Barton Peveril and Eastleigh Colleges should be encouraged to submit a joint development plan.

· The Hampshire 14-19 Pathfinder should be evaluated at the end of its two year span and, if successful, placed on a longer term footing. The LSC should also make every effort to ensure that Increased Flexibility (IF) funding continues.

· The governors of 11-18 schools with less than 100 students in the sixth form should be invited to consider the implications of this figure and other data supplied to them and to provide a formal response to questions from the LSC. In the light of this response a decision should be taken by the LSC on what further action should be initiated.

· The LSC and LEA should convene a meeting with representatives of independent schools in Southampton and South West Hampshire to explore mutually beneficial local collaboration.

· The LSC should explore rationalisation of the number of work-based learning providers with which it contracts and steps should be taken to integrate planning and implementation opportunities for work related learning and work experience.

· Stage 2 should undertake a full review of adult and community learning in the area.

4.4 Mid and North Hampshire

· The LSC should note the lack of evidence to support the creation of any new sixth form in the area.

· The LSC should publish and consult upon a joint statement with the LEA to cover all aspects of their 14-19 strategy.

· With the LEA and Connexions, the LSC should conduct a review of the post-16 Special Educational Needs (SEN) of students.

· An assessment of the match between learner needs and the level of careers guidance provided in schools should be undertaken and the support available to students from Connexions needs clarification.

· The LSC should work with partners on a programme for encouraging re-entry to learning by young adults.

· The LSC should work with the County and District Councils and the colleges to ensure that new housing and industrial developments include, from the outset, provision for the learning needs of the students for which it has funding responsibilities.

· An assessment of the costs of student transport and the effect of present arrangements on the participation and retention of students should be carried out and acted upon.

· With employers, the LSC should publicise plans for the future development of work-based learning and raise awareness of the need to increase opportunities for work-based learning.

· In association with Learning Partnerships, the LSC should encourage the sharing of best practice between providers.

· The LSC should clarify, in association with the LEA, its role in developing adult and community learning and consider the membership and support of Community Learning Forums

· The LSC should work with higher education (HE) partners to improve progression routes should be undertaken.

· The LSC should explore, through funding mechanisms or access to affordable housing, ways of reducing the effect on teacher supply and retention of the financial disadvantages colleges encounter from lack of an appropriate area allowance.

5 Responses to findings

5.1 In general terms, as these reviews have progressed there has been closer involvement of the LEA and of schools. At the outset, LARs appeared to concentrate on post-16 education and training. As the 14-19 agenda has developed, both nationally and locally, the focus of the reviews has shifted and their relevance to 11-16 schools has become clearer. The work of these reviews made apparent the need for the LEA and the LSC to work in partnership on the development of a 14-19 strategy for Hampshire and have resulted in regular meetings of senior LEA and LSC officers. This has led to better co-ordination on a number of related issues, such as responses to capital requests by schools with sixth forms. Closer co-operation also allows the local authority, along with the LSC and Connexions, to make more effective preparations for future 14-19 area Ofsted inspection.

5.2 In Portsmouth and South East Hampshire a series of single issue seminars were set up and a team of consultants, KPMG, were commissioned to write a 13-19 strategy for the area and undertake a review of the strategic options for the provision of post-16 education in the Fareham and Gosport area.

5.3 The strategy for the area has, in part, been superseded by the Hampshire strategy for 14-19 education and training and by the Tomlinson report. However, each region will need to develop a local response to the strategy within their own local area.

5.4 The strategic options review has concluded that there is a lack of effective collaboration between providers in Fareham and Gosport, duplication and competition in level 3 (A and AS level) provision and insufficient level 1 and level 2 (GCSE level) provision, especially in vocational subjects. Consultation on possible structural re-organisation of post-16 provision in the Fareham and Gosport area is currently being conducted by the LSC.

5.5 In Southampton and South West Hampshire there were a number of LEA and LSC joint responses. A letter was sent to two schools in the south west area with small sixth forms, inviting them to consider the comments in the review and to respond. Those responses were inconclusive and the DfES five-year strategy has placed the debate on temporary hold. A meeting was held with secondary school headteachers of Hampshire 11-16 schools where the findings or the review were discussed and responses received. The LEA and LSC also met jointly with independent school headteachers in order to share the recommendations and the 14-19 strategy with them. The review of the Eastleigh consortium, as well as other case studies, has been included in the 14-19 strategy. Evaluation of the Pathfinder has demonstrated a number of positive effects resulting from its work.

5.6 An independent consultant has been commissioned by the LSC to follow up the recommendations of the Mid and North Hampshire review with a view to making them more specific and to addressing some of the areas highlighted within the body of the report which did not form part of the final recommendations. This follow-up work is currently taking place and is intended to lead to a response to stage one of the report and amended recommendations

6 Legal implications

6.1 None

7 Financial implications

6.1 None

8 Personnel implications

8.1 None

9 Impact assessment

9.1 Race and equality impact assessment has been considered in the development of this report and no adverse impact has been identified.

10 Crime prevention issues

10.1 None

11 Views of the Local County Councillor

10.1 These reviews have taken place across the county and, therefore, the views of individual councillors have not been sought.

Recommendations

1 That Members note the findings of the Local Area Reviews and the developments which have arisen from them to date.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background documents

The following documents discuss facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and have been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB: the list excludes

1. Published works

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

None.