Contact: Lionel Paris, Head of Adult and Community Learning,
telephone: 01962 846848, e-mail: [email protected]

1 Summary

1.1 This report informs the Executive Member of various developments in the County Council's provision of adult learning and the funding relationship with the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Learning and Skills Council (local LSC). It updates the Executive Member on the outcome of changes introduced at the start of 2004/2005 and explains further changes being considered by Government and the LSC.

1.2 The report introduces three planning documents which are required by the local LSC as a condition of the funding agreement with the County Council and confirms the funding being offered for the period August 2005 to July 2006. Files containing copies of the Self-Assessment Report 2003/2004, the Quality Improvement Plan for 2005/2006 and the rolling three year Adult Learning Development Plan for 2005/2008 which includes the Business Plan for 2005/2006 are available in the Members' Room.

1.3 Reference is made to a county-wide fees policy which has been developed with providers. The Executive Member is alerted to the intended inspection of the County Council's adult learning provision during the next year.

1.4 The Executive Member is invited to note the report prior to approving the updated three year Development Plan.

2 Background

2.1 The local LSC funds the County Council's Adult and Community Learning Unit (ACLU) to secure the provision of adult learning through an annual funding agreement. The ACLU receives a block grant to support the delivery of provision and performance is monitored against agreed target numbers of learners. The ACLU is expected to comply with LSC funding criteria in the use of the grant and to ensure that the provision matches national quality standards set by the Adult Learning Inspectorate in a Common Inspection Framework. Most of the County Council's provision is in turn secured through funding agreements with a network of local providers. The relationship between the ACLU and the providers is essentially that of a sub-contractor using LSC funding to support locally managed programmes of learning.

2.2 The funding agreement between the local LSC and the County Council was initially based on annual Adult Learning Plans but the LSC switched to a rolling three year development plan in August 2004 in line with arrangements that existed for post-16 colleges and providers of work-based learning. The County Council's plan for the period August 2003 to July 2006 was agreed in July 2004. It included a business plan for 2004/2005 which responded to guidance issued by the local LSC at the start of the planning process. The value of the funding available from the local LSC in 2004/2005 had been reduced and the Government had introduced a national skills strategy with changed priorities for the LSC. It was anticipated by the local LSC that over time, the level of subsidy to support adult learners joining courses out of personal interest would reduce and more resources would be made available for work with adults with low levels of qualification. Consequently, it was agreed that 2004/2005 would be a transitional year during which the tuition costs of some leisure-based courses would be covered by increased charges to learners. The County Council continued to subsidise the full cost of delivering such courses at schools, and maintained the same level of fee discounts for older learners and those on low income through subsidies paid from the County Council's `community use of schools' budget. The LSC funding released through this strategy would help balance the ACLU's costs and help develop programmes with a more skills-based focus.

2.3 The changes came at a time when providers were finalising the publication of course prospectuses for the new year. There was little time to agree a county-wide approach and local providers managed the changes in different ways. Despite the initial confusion, over 500 leisure-based courses continued engaging 4,250 learners. The need for tutor redundancies was successfully avoided. About 700 enrolments on these courses by older learners and over 100 by those on low income received fee discounts during the autumn and spring terms, at a cost to the County Council of £20,000. Overall, enrolment on the courses which continued to receive LSC funding stood up quite well, although there was some variation between areas as a result of local factors. During the year, the LSC carried out a national consultation on a reform of the funding arrangements for adult learning which sought to apply a safeguard for the funding of learning opportunities for personal fulfilment. This suggestion of continued support has encouraged the ACLU to bring some learners back into the LSC funded programme this term. The final picture will not become clear until during the autumn term after providers have completed all the data returns relating to performance in the year ending in August 2005. Overall, it seems that the LSC's main targets for 2004/05 will be met.

2.4 The LSC's consultation paper Reforming the Funding and Planning Arrangements for First Step, Personal and Community Development Learning for Adults was published in September 2004 seeking responses by the end of December. The paper proposed the continuation of Family Learning and Family Literacy, Language and Numeracy courses at a level of support which would make them free to learners. Courses teaching Skills for Independent Living would also be free for those adults with learning difficulties and disabilities or adults recovering from mental illness. However, it proposed that the core offer of ACL programmes (formerly known as non-vocational or leisure learning courses) should be divided into:

· First Steps - learning which is offered as an initial entry point into learning and from which learners are actively encouraged and supported to progress into other forms of learning (aimed at learners who do not possess a full level 2 qualification - this is equivalent to 5 passes at GCSE, grades A to C).

· Learning for Personal Development - learning for personal development, cultural enrichment, intellectual or creative stimulation and for enjoyment, and for which there is no requirement that learners must necessarily progress to other learning.

The paper proposed that LSC support for First Step courses should be based on a subsidy per adult learner, but that Learning for Personal Development should be supported at a lower level with an allocation per hour of delivery, regardless of the number participating.

2.5 As yet, there has been no formal response from the LSC to the consultation in the form of a decision about the way forward. The breakdown of adult learning into different categories remains attractive, but the responses to the consultation showed that this was likely to prove complex in practice. The availability of funding for First Steps learning is a real issue. Consequently, the LSC is still unable to introduce a national funding formula for ACL. Furthermore, the LSC has conducted an extensive review of FE funding during the year, Agenda for Change, which is already having a negative impact on colleges' provision of ACL courses. The production of three year plans is proving difficult for all providers due to changes in the funding arrangements whose impacts has yet to be clarified, coupled with great pressure on budgets. These difficulties are further magnified for ACL by the lack of clarity about how to secure first step learning alongside learning for personal development. The local LSC recognises that it is very difficult to plan for years two and three and is only expecting outline targets for learner numbers based on projections of the first year's targets. Particular importance is thus being placed on the business plan for 2005/2006.

2.6 The local LSC has given notice that the County Council will continue to be supported in 2005/2006 through a block grant which includes a number of different elements. The ACLU has been told to assume the same level of funding in planning for next year, although the figures actually confirmed to date represent a reduction of about £38,000 on the 2004/2005 allocation. This includes £20,000 formerly allocated to support achievement by ethnic minorities. Inflation has not been added, which is equivalent to a further loss in value of over £70,000.

2.7 The County Council's allocation has been increased by inflation but reduced by an efficiency saving of £8,000. The County Council's contribution to the adult learning budget is now equivalent to less than 7% of the funds made available by the local LSC. The revenue funding available in 2005/2006 is as follows:

2.8 The revenue funding available in 2005/2006 is as follows:

Table 1 : Adult learning budget 2005/2006

Planned efficiency savings are reducing the County Council's contribution by £8,000 in 2005/06, which accounts for the 3.1% difference. However, a one-off additional sum of £45,000 is being carried forward, following an underspend in 2004/2005. This resulted from underperformance by some providers which was not revealed until after the end of the financial year.

2.9 Even though the LSC has discontinued the funding specifically for ethnic minorities' achievement, the programmes for Bengali and Nepali speaking parents will be continued by the ACLU using funding from the LSC's core funding allocation. The provision is delivered through the County Council's Ethnic Minority Achievement Service.

2.10 The ACLU also received £60,000 in 2004/2005 for quality improvement, which was co-financed by the LSC and the European Social Fund. This will not be available in 2005/2006 and the ACLU is expected to fund quality improvement from the LSC's block grant.

2.11 The local LSC has also confirmed an allocation of £475,000 capital funding to support on-going access improvements at 23 secondary schools for learners with disabilities, as part of a programme to ensure better compliance with the provisions of the Disabilities Discrimination Act.

3 The planning framework

3.1 The ACLU's funding agreement with the local LSC is dependent upon approval of the following :

· Self-Assessment Report on 2003/2004 - submitted 31 March 2005

· Quality Improvement Plan 2005/2006 - submitted 31 March 2005

· Adult Learning Development Plan August 2005 to July 2008 (incorporating the 2005/06 Business Plan) - draft submitted 30 June 2005 subject to approval by the Executive Member.

A file with copies of all three documents is available in the Members' Room.

3.2 Self-assessment Report: The self-assessment is mapped against the key judgements in the common inspection framework. Each LEA is expected to collect evidence of the strengths and weaknesses of its provision for ACL and to grade itself accordingly. The curriculum is divided into 14 areas of learning ranging from `science and mathematics' (area of learning 1) to `foundation programmes' (area of learning 14). The ACLU is required to grade the quality of provision in each of these areas. There also has to be an assessment for `equality of opportunity' and `quality assurance' across all programme areas. All the grades contribute to an overall grade for `leadership and management'. Evidence is drawn from an analysis of the management information data about individual learners, self-assessment reports compiled by individual providers, feedback from lesson observations mainly conducted by consultants engaged for the purpose, and monitoring and support visits carried out by ACLU staff. The results of the self-assessment of 2003/04 are intended to inform the Quality Improvement Plan for 2005/2006.

3.3 The detailed findings of the self-assessment are shown in the report. The overall grade for leadership and management in 2003/2004 has been assessed as - satisfactory. The key strengths include the following:

· Good strategic leadership

· Effective operational management

· Effective internal and external partnerships that meet community needs

· Good range of effective quality assurance measures to improve the provision

Key weaknesses were found to be as follows:

· Insufficient initial assessment of learners

· Insufficient recording of progress and achievement

· Insufficient use of management information data to inform planning

· Insufficient classroom observations undertaken

It is important to stress that these judgements relate to the whole of the provider network, not just the ACLU. They highlight one of the particular challenges of managing a sub-contracted service. Successful performance is ultimately decided at the point of delivery and achieving consistency across over 100 different providers continues to be very difficult. The ACLU sets the standards, but has much less control over the response by individual providers than in a directly managed service.

3.4 Quality Improvement Plan: Inevitably, the plan for any one year is a compromise between the work needing to be done and the resources available to do the work. The reduction in the funding support for quality improvement referred to previously has made this particularly problematic for 2005/2006. The Plan sets out 14 priority actions grouped around three key improvement areas - achievements and standards, quality of education and leadership and management. Targets and success criteria are set alongside each action, together with timescales and monitoring/evaluation arrangements. Finally, the cost of delivering the Plan is itemised, totalling £160,000.

3.5 Adult Learning Development Plan: The format of the plan has been revised by the local LSC for 2005/2008, in an attempt to minimise workload while still ensuring that the LSC receives sufficient information to understand the plan and the potential issues and risks associated with it. The Plan is organised into 10 sections and information is presented as bullet points in answer to a series of questions in each section. The resulting document is shorter and more accessible than previous plans requested by the LSC, but it still runs to nearly 30 pages with 11 appendices.

3.6 The strategic objectives for 2005/2006 are to:

· Provide a range of learning opportunities aimed at engaging adults with low skills to progress to a full level 2 qualification

· Further develop Skills for Life provision with schools and the community in priority areas, through Family Literacy, Language and Numeracy

· Embed family learning provision, targeting any development in priority areas

· Seek to widen adult participation through First Steps, Family Learning and Skills for Independent Living programmes

· Consolidate levels of learner retention and their achievement

· Support schools in becoming centres of learning in their communities as part of the extended schools strategy (as reported to the Education and Policy Review Committee meeting on 15 March 2005)

· Maintain a culture of continuous quality improvement

· Actively promote collaboration within the network of adult learning providers in Hampshire.

3.7 The most significant changes put forward in the plan include:

· re-structuring the core curriculum offer into First Steps, Learning for Personal Development and Skills for Independent Living

· lowering the target number of learners in 2005/2006 by 4,350 as a consequence of reduced funding and cost absorption

· introducing more coherent progression routes, particularly within the Family Learning programmes

· shifting the focus of widening participation from adults who have not engaged in learning programmes for the past 3 years, to learners who do not hold a level 2 qualification

· introducing a new fees policy and revising the allocation of funding to support changed programme lengths and weightings.

· Working with staff in Social Services to deliver provision for adults with learning disabilities and/or learning difficulties. Programmes are linked to `person centred planning' and promote self-advocacy. It is planned to engage 150 learners at a cost of about £20,000.

3.8 The target learner numbers for LSC funded programmes proposed for 2005/06 are as follows:

Table 2

Learning for Personal Development 8,200

First Steps 1,400

Skills for Independent Living 1,400

Family Learning 3,700

Family Literacy, Language and Numeracy 1,900

Total 16,600

Other leisure-based courses will continue to be offered by providers on a self-financing basis.

3.9 Comparison with previous years is problematic. The LSC's priorities and planning guidance have changed for each of the past four years. Also, the statistical basis for counting learners has shifted from the number of enrolments on courses, to the number of individual learners regardless of their enrolments or the number of courses they follow. It is difficult to compare `like with like'.

3.10 The target numbers assume no further reduction in the available funding during the period August 2005 to July 2006. The LSC recognises that the level of resource per learner presently made available to the ACLU and consequently to providers, remains amongst the lowest in the SE Region and the fees charged to learners amongst the highest. There is little scope for further efficiency saving. Any reduction in funding will inevitably result in a deterioration of service and a loss of learners.

3 Fees policy

4.1 The separation of courses into LSC funded and self-funded programmes at the start of 2004/2005 highlighted the wide variation in fees charged to learners by different providers. There were also widely differing practices with regard to fee discounts in support of older learners and those on low income. Responsibility for setting fees rests with the providers in a sub-contracted service. The Adult Learning Officer has worked with providers to gain their support for a more coherent policy for fees which will apply across the County. The variation between different areas of the county is too great to allow the introduction of a standard fee structure in 2005/2006, but providers have agreed to work within minimum and maximum limits. Overtime, the policy will allow a gradual convergence to a standard charge.

Providers have agreed to apply a uniform 25% fee discount for learners over 60 and a 50% reduction in fees for those on low income.

4.2 The fees policy is linked to a revised weighting used to determine the level of support for different course programmes. First Step, Family Learning and Family Literacy, Language and Numeracy courses are free to the learner and funded at indicative rates set nationally. Providers have agreed that learners joining courses for Personal Development will be expected to contribute approximately 60% of the provider's cost in delivering the course.

Table 3 : Charges to Learners 2005/2006

Table 4: Income to provider per learner

4 Learndirect

5.1 The ACLU entered into a contract with the Hampshire and Solent Learning Hub this year to run a pilot project at Waterlooville Library. A Development Worker was employed to establish a `Learndirect Centre' where individual members of the public can access on-line learning materials and courses using ICT facilities in the library. The pilot is proving to be a success with a steady increase in the number of learners enrolled. Potentially, the contract is worth about £30,000 if the full target of 240 learners is achieved. Payment is made on completion of the courses, so it is difficult to estimate the eventual outcome. However, the Development Worker has extended provision to the newly opened Discovery Centre in Gosport. There is potential for rolling out the programme across all libraries in Hampshire, but the risk is high. Funding is only paid against performance and it comes with the same rigorous quality conditions as those required by the LSC through the ACLU's own contract for adult learning . The pilot has been supported using some of the funding from the County Council. The ACLU intends to increase provision gradually as more experience is gained about actual levels of take-up.

5 Inspection

5.1 The ACLU has received informal notice that the Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI) has scheduled an inspection of the County Council's adult learning provision sometime during the spring term 2006. The lead inspector will contact the ACLU to give six weeks notice of the actual dates. The inspection usually lasts one week, although it can be extended. It is likely that the inspection will include a range of visits to observe teaching and learning in the centres being funded. The team of ALI inspectors will also take special account of the ACLU's Self-Assessment Report' Quality Improvement Plan, and Development Plan. Key staff will be interviewed and the lead inspector may wish to meet with the Executive Member. The focus throughout will be on assessing the impact on learners. The inspection process and exact details of the inspectors' requirements will be finalised at a planning meeting at the start of the notice period.

5.2 The County Council will be given a grade for the overall effectiveness of the adult learning provision, using the same four point scale described in the paragraph about self-assessment. The criteria for the grades are as follows:

· Grade 1: Outstanding - leadership and management and 50% of the 14 areas of learning (AoLs) judged to be grade 1

· Grade 2: Good - leadership and management and 50% of AoLs grade 2. No grade 4s. Few grade 3s.

· Grade 3: Satisfactory - Leadership and management and 66% AoLs judged to be satisfactory or better. Possibility of some grade 4s.

· Grade 4: Inadequate - More than 33% of AoLs plus leadership and management inadequate.

5.3 Published reports following ALI inspections have highlighted a number of concerns and perceived weaknesses inherent to those LEAs delivering services through sub-contractors. These focus mainly on the effectiveness of quality assurance systems and the difficulty of achieving consistency at the point of delivery. The ACLU has well documented policies, procedures and standards in place, supported by guidance materials. In general, these tend to be followed by family learning providers, many of whom have only recently become engaged. Internal monitoring visits by ACLU staff point to real concerns at some of the more established providers, where managers and experienced tutors have not fully responded to the changed expectations. This is difficult to enforce as the staff are not line managed by the ACLU. There is also a concern about the time taken to input data about all the learners across the network of providers. The present funding system allocates against targets, clawing back funding where there is underperformance. The system depends upon the timely return of data so that funding can be re-allocated within the year. Late returns of data makes this problematic. These concerns reflect the low level of resource available to support delivery, but this is unlikely to be taken into account by the inspection team.

5.4 The ACLU has been delivering pre-inspection training to providers throughout the past year. Further briefings are being arranged and registered ALI inspectors are being engaged as consultants to support preparations. Managers will be provided with check lists of actions needed. Headteachers, community management committees and school governors will be asked to monitor compliance with the quality assurance procedures by their adult tutors.

6 Legal implications

6.1 There are no legal implications of this report.

7 Financial implications

7.1 The financial implications are included in the report.

8 Personnel implications

8.1 A Data Entry post has been created in the ACLU to speed up the analysis of financial and management information and to support the monitoring of performance. The post will be funded entirely from the LSC grant.

9 Impact assessment

9.1 Race and equality impact assessment has been considered in the development of this report. Both the Self-Assessment Report and the Development Plan include sections monitoring performance and setting actions for improvement. The new fees policy will improve access to learning for those over 60 and those on low income. Providers have been trained in new policies with regard to confidential disclosure procedures for learners with disabilities seeking learner support. The ACLU will offer some alternative support to Hampshire's Ethnic Minority Achievement Service, following the LSC's grant being discontinued. Overall, a positive impact is expected.

10 Crime prevention issues

10.1 The delivery of adult learning on school sites out of school hours ensures a presence and helps deter vandalism and improves security..

11 Views of the Local County Councillor

11.1 The report relates to county-wide development.

Recommendation

1. That the Excutive Member notes the content of this report prior to approving the Adult Learning Development Plan 2005/2008.

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.