Learning: For All. For Life. A report from the Independent Review of Community Learning and Development (CLD)

What the Review learned a and what needs to be done about it

As noted in the previous section, I was specifically asked to provide information and recommendations on the following:

1. Effective and consistently measured outcomes delivered through CLD and reported across the sector. This includes data on the CLD workforce, engagement opportunities and outcomes for learners.

2. Delivering positive outcomes and improved life chances for marginalised and vulnerable learners in communities, in the context of wider education reform and public finance constraints.

3. A strong and suitably professionalised CLD workforce equipped to deliver high quality outcomes for learners.

To do this in a way that was consistent with my determination for the review to look at these points through the lens of a CLD learner or potential learner, I decided to structure my evidence-gathering around four key themes (as set out below – with some of the questions I was looking to answer in bullet form):

Theme 1 – Visibility & Awareness:

• Do people understand what CLD is and does;
• How visible is CLD (and its component parts) to potential learners, decision-makers, budget-holders and other related service providers;
• Is there sufficient awareness amongst potential learners, decision-makers and budget-holders on the positive outcomes that CLD can help to deliver;
• If somebody could benefit from CLD services, how do they know this and how do they find out what might be available;
• How is CLD – as a profession, approach and service – seen by decision-makers, budget- holders and related service professionals?

Theme 2 – Accessibility& Availability:

• If someone wants to do CLD learning, how likely are they to find what they need or want, and at a time/setting that suits their circumstances;
• Do we have a clear picture of what the need for CLD is;
• What are the main barriers to someone accessing CLD or continuing their CLD learning journey;
• Is it effective in reaching out and meeting the needs of the 'voices seldom heard';
• In a time of very tight budgets, is it possible to get the right balance between universal and targeted provision;
• How sustainable and predictable is the learning on offer?

Theme 3 – Support & Learning:

• Are CLD staff and volunteers sufficiently trained/qualified to support a learner's journey towards achieving high-quality positive outcomes;
• How are CLD staff and volunteers seen by other related professionals;
• Is learning taking place in a safe and welcoming environment;
• How open is CLD provision to learners from more diverse and marginalised backgrounds;
• How 'joined-up' are CLD services to other related services, such as schools, mental health support, benefits/money advice, Colleges, Universities, employability services, etc;
• How integrated is CLD into the wider education and skills system?

Theme 4 – Pathways & Progression:

• How do learners know and record the progress being made;
• How do we best measure (locally and nationally) the positive outcomes that CLD is delivering;
• What, if any, are the challenges for a CLD learner moving to the next stage of their learning, and how are they overcome?

The accompanying Evidence Report summarises the feedback across these themes, which I have drawn on, alongside the Literature Review and other relevant reports and statistical data, to produce this CLD Review Report.

Before moving on to summarise what I have heard, read and seen throughout the intensive evidence-gathering phase of the review, and prior to setting out my recommendations on what needs to be done, there's an important general point to make right from the start.

The CLD Review was asked to consider alignment with the findings of the wider education and skills proposed reforms. Much of what is in this report builds upon and aligns well with the findings of both the Withers and Hayward reviews into skills and education. In addition, evidence from this review leads me to recommend the development of a clear and cohesive Scottish Government policy narrative on Life-Long Learning. One that goes beyond the hitherto focus on careers and employability (crucially important as they are) and accepts that there will be different motivations behind why people want to learn. Moreover, not everyone will learn well within the current institutional structures, so alternative or additional approaches need to be available.

As I mentioned earlier, there is a lot of great CLD work going on across the country, with people's lives being transformed as a result. Nevertheless, lack of strategic leadership, fragmentation, unclear roles and responsibilities, tight budgets and workforce limitations are bumping against an increasing need for the support provided through CLD, meaning that CLD, as a service and a profession, is at a critical tipping-point.

If we want CLD to continue to be available as an approach that delivers positive outcomes for some of our most vulnerable and marginalised people, then urgent steps need to be taken to stabilise the current situation. This needs to be followed-up with a sustained, clear, measurable and inclusive effort to ensure that CLD can fulfil its potential to tackle many of Scotland's most acute social and economic challenges.

What the Review Learned

Visibility & Awareness

Overall, whilst some feedback highlighted good visibility and awareness of CLD in their local areas, the visibility of the CLD sector is limited across the wider public due to it being poorly defined, the relatively vague nature of the existing CLD Regulation, the term CLD not being understood, a low policy profile nationally and fragmented delivery provision.

Although there is widespread understanding amongst learners and others about what the component parts of CLD (e.g. Youth Work, Adult Learning, etc) are for and what they set out to deliver, the term 'CLD' is much less widely understood (with many still referring to it as 'Community Education'). It's difficult to be clear on cause and effect, but what appears to be an increasing tendency in Local Authorities not to have an identifiable 'CLD service', or for CLD services to sit in or be spread across a wide range of areas, including housing, education, communities, planning or in an 'arms-length external organisations (ALEOs)', illustrates the challenge for CLD to be seen as a holistic and visible service. Relatedly, staff working to provide CLD services will often have different job titles, and possibly salaries, depending on which Local Authority they work for. Similarly, the levels of experience and/or qualifications and/or Continuous Professional Development (CPD) requirements can also differ. This appears to place additional pressure on staff who are spending time and resource educating managers about CLD where they are not familiar with the service or approach. This issue around varying job titles and salaries would appear to be replicated across the Third Sector, where the majority of the CLD staff and volunteers can be found.

Throughout the evidence-gathering phase I heard regularly about how CLD staff in Local Authorities, in partnership with local voluntary organisations, played an absolutely critical role in reaching out and serving communities during the Covid-19 pandemic, with many describing it as a 'crisis' or 'emergency' response role. Now, as budgets have become increasingly challenging for Local Authorities and the Third Sector, CLD services and staffing numbers are being squeezed, perhaps more so than services that have a tighter statutory underpinning. Clearly this impacts on the range of CLD opportunities that can be provided by Local Authorities and the Third Sector (more on that in the Availability & Accessibility section below). However, it also impacts negatively in terms of service visibility and awareness for potential learners. I have heard that outreach work, undertaken by CLD staff and volunteers who know the communities in which they are based, is a key step in identifying those who could benefit from Youth Work, Adult Learning, ESOL, etc. This often needs to be followed by a process of trust-building and confidence- building to help the potential learner take the next steps. It takes time (which is difficult to quantify from the outset) and it takes people. The message I heard repeatedly is that workload pressures mean that much of this outreach and nurturing work cannot be given the attention it truly deserves.

Many of the learners I met told me that their first awareness of CLD services came through visits to local libraries and community centres. The potential for Local Authority budget pressures to lead to reduced hours, and possibly closure, of these community resources is also likely to impact on CLD visibility. Some Local Authorities are seeking to raise awareness and visibility through online means, including social media. That is welcome and good practice could usefully be shared with other Local Authorities and with the Third Sector. However, if it becomes the only or predominant means of communicating opportunities, then some key CLD target groups, such as those with limited digital or English-language proficiency, or those living in rural settings with limited access to internet connectivity, could find themselves excluded.

I was surprised to hear that word of mouth was often the way that people found out about CLD provision, along with references to attending courses or volunteering at local community groups and information via educational establishments. It seems to me to be an unsystematic approach to accessing services that depends on the learner having to be clear on what they want from CLD and then knowing how to navigate their way through to access provision. As a result, reaching some of our communities that could benefit from CLD remains a challenge.

In my discussions about learners' needs I asked about equity of access to CLD, and the need to tackle equalities-related barriers. Stakeholders referred to a wide range of protected characteristics and other groups who may face particular challenges in accessing CLD, including people from minority ethnic backgrounds, people with disabilities, refugees and those in asylum hotels, and those in deprived and/or rural locations where digital poverty may be a significant issue. There is limited evidence on the groups who may find it more difficult to access CLD, and the form that those difficulties may take. This suggests a need for further work to be done. Potentially, this is a task that could be undertaken by establishing a CLD Equalities Forum.

When asked why they accessed CLD services learners told me they wanted to learn new skills and languages; socialise and have fun, feel safe and be listened to, get involved in volunteering and community work, improve their mental health and well-being and improve their employment options. Learners want CLD to be accessible to all and free at the point of contact. Cost was noted as a significant barrier particularly for young people, those with disabilities and those living in rural areas. The provision of food and subsistence, childcare and device connectivity have enabled access.

Some learners noted how it can be difficult for them to be aware of learning opportunities, or for their prior learning to be fully recognised, when they move to a different Local Authority area.

I heard how a reducing role for direct provision through Local Authorities is leading to increased demands being placed on Third Sector and voluntary organisations. These organisations have played, and will continue to play, a crucial role in delivering CLD services across Scotland, often doing so to groups with specific needs or characteristics. So, the increasing reliance on them to fill gaps left by less Local Authority provision is understandable. It does, however, further illustrate the fragmentation of provision; the challenge of coordination; and the potential for learners to remain unaware of opportunities that may be open to them. Similarly, there appears to be an increasingly wide range of job titles and responsibilities, together with variations on pay and conditions across the voluntary sector CLD workforce, and limits on career development and progression pathways.

It's now 20 years since The Big Plus was launched in Scotland. This awareness raising campaign targeted adults who might be unable to achieve their aspirations due to a lack of literacy and/or numeracy skills. The campaign has not been active for several years, although Skills Development Scotland, as part of its career services, has a role in signposting to local adult literacy and numeracy support. It does this online and through referrals by its helpline and careers advisers. SDS does not provide the learning directly or track learner numbers or their progress.

Many of the practitioners and stakeholders I spoke to commented on how the launch of The Big Plus was the last time they could recall a Scottish nationwide adult learning campaign enjoying such a high profile, with some going on to flag the contrast with the more recent UK Government publicity campaign promoting the Multiply numeracy programme, funded by the UK Government and delivered by Scottish Local Authorities and the Third Sector. It does strike me as odd that the most high-profile publicity campaign in the past two decades for adult learning in Scotland – which is an area devolved to the Scottish Parliament – is being undertaken by the UK Government to promote a UK Government-funded programme.

My discussions with learners, stakeholders, decision-makers and budget-holders repeatedly returned to a similar theme – the need for a much more strategic leadership approach to CLD across the country as a whole. In my view, this needs to be driven by the Scottish Government, working in partnership with CoSLA, and involve key CLD stakeholders, with an enhanced role for the CLD Standards Council. This leadership approach needs to be shaped and tested on an iterative basis by learners themselves. It needs to be sustained and resourced. It needs to counter the current impression felt by many in and around the sector of 'directionless drift'.

Given the important role that CLD is already playing to deliver positive outcomes in line with the National Performance Framework, and the potential for it to be doing more in tackling many of Scotland's biggest challenges, many of those I spoke with expressed disappointment and frustration at what they argue is a lack of attention and support for CLD from the Scottish Government. The decision by the Minister for Further Education, Higher Education and Veterans to launch this review was warmly welcomed by those involved in the CLD sector, viewing it as a positive indication of a renewed interest and awareness from the Scottish Government. Nevertheless, many have remarked on the split between the 'learning' and 'community development' elements of CLD across different Ministers and policy areas of the Scottish Government which, they argue, sends a confused message to the local level around the importance of seeing CLD in a holistic way. Similarly, the absence of sustained and resourced Scottish Government leadership and vision for CLD has also been a theme across input received during this review. While reading a history of CLD, written in 2015, I came across the following description of the attention given to CLD when Communities Scotland was abolished in 2008 and policy responsibility shifted to the Scottish Government:

'CLD was seen as peripheral within a Directorate heavily focused on the areas of large-scale public expenditure on higher and further education, and which, despite its name ... was not strongly influenced in its day-to-day work by an overall concept of lifelong learning.'^[39]

Many in the sector will be of the view that not much has changed for the better since then.

Although the May 2022 publication of Scotland's first ever Adult Learning Strategy was a significant and welcome development, the absence of funding to support its implementation and the delays in putting in place its governance structures, have since led to deep disappointment. The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic clearly played an important part in the delay, but it is now also almost five years since work on a new Youth Work Strategy got underway, yet there is still no clarity on when, or if, it will be published. Budgetary pressures within the Scottish Government are such that, even if it is finalised and published, there is unlikely to be any new financial resource to support its implementation. Therefore, the imperative should be to consider how existing resources could be used better to ensure progress is made and sustained.

There is scope for greater clarity on respective areas of responsibility for CLD across government and associated bodies. I accept that might be challenging at the present time due to uncertainty over the future of Education Scotland, but it needs to be done as soon as possible. The CLD Standards Council, given the limited resources supporting its work, does a good job in raising standards across CLD, raising its profile and supporting those working in the sector. As I will set out in future sections, there is more that it can be asked to do. It will need to be suitably resourced if it is to do so. All of which ought to help improve the visibility and raise awareness of CLD.

Given the central and statutory role played by Local Authorities in securing CLD provision, the Minister's agreement to consider the recommendations of this review alongside the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (CoSLA) is welcome and important. As I understand it, there is no single CoSLA lead for CLD. However there are various spokespersons who have an interest in CLD for their portfolio interest. It might make sense for CoSLA to look at this as it engages with the Scottish Government in following-up on this review.

My remit for this review doesn't include all elements of CLD (although I have considered input which argues strongly for the learning and community development elements to be seen as mutually-reinforcing), let alone other elements of the education and skills system. I was, however, asked to consider how CLD can continue to play a critical part of the wider system as it evolves to meet the needs of the people of Scotland. As noted above, the biggest challenge in doing so is the absence of a clear, over-arching policy narrative which sets out the Scottish Government's vision for education and learning as a whole.

This review comes on the back of earlier reviews into other aspects of the education and skills system, and whilst all those reviews are making an important contribution, there is a need for the Scottish Government to develop a narrative to pull together the various strands. The narrative I am suggesting is necessary is one which should better reflect that people will need or want to learn throughout their lifetime, and that they will benefit from that learning in multiple ways. So, rather than talking about a 'Learner Journey', we need to see it as a true 'Life-Long Learning Journey', during which the individual will have different motivations for learning needs and wants, and the system needs to be ready to support that. This should also be based on an understanding that not everyone will flourish in 'traditional' or 'formal' education settings, and that those settings may not always be best able to provide additional support to those who need it. In setting it out in this way, the critical and integral role of CLD becomes very clear. It should also be helpful in reconsidering the existing balance of funding across all learning settings.

Availability & Accessibility

It is, of course, right for Local Authorities to secure provision of CLD in a way that best suits local needs. However, divergence in approach, service naming, staff designation and roles, mean that the overall picture is a bit confused. The view I've heard expressed by learners and potential learners across the country is that there is a strong element of 'chance' and 'postcode lottery' in terms of CLD service availability.

The growth in online provision necessitated by the Covid-19 pandemic has improved overall availability. I heard from learners in rural areas, those working unpredictable hours and/or those with caring responsibilities about how important the online offer can be, but it won't be suitable for everyone, and it can make it more difficult in terms of the personal engagement underpinning trust-building between the learner and the CLD professional or volunteer. There are also equity issues around the costs associated with getting online, together with practical digital connectivity challenges in some of our more rural and island communities. It will become an increasingly important means of delivering CLD learning, but it needs to be part of a wider package of flexible and adaptable learning opportunities. The need for local community-based provisions remains critical – especially in rural areas.

Evidence from the Literature Review and throughout the wider evidence gathered has highlighted that the key enablers to participation in CLD include:

• Flexibility and adaptability
• Culturally competent and empathetic practitioners
• Safe, trusting environments
• Localised delivery and proactive outreach
• Partnerships between CLD providers and other services
• Learner-focused delivery

The Literature Review specifically highlighted three different categories of barriers to participation in CLD. Firstly, dispositional – lacking confidence, concerns about age or personal abilities, previous poor experience of the education system. Secondly, situational – personal family circumstances and responsibilities such as caring responsibilities, the need for childcare or looking for provision to fit around work commitments. Lastly, institutional/ structural factors – how socio-economic factors and poverty manifests in lower levels of literacy and educational attainment.

One of the biggest and most-often heard challenges for learners to access learning was a structural barrier related to a lack of suitable public transport options. It may strike some as an obvious barrier to learning for those living in Scotland's rural and island communities but come as more of a surprise to learn that it was also regularly flagged as an issue for those living in urban areas. Cost, frequency and reliability are issues affecting many learners and potential learners across the country. It goes without saying that public transport performance is beyond my remit, but for me it underlines the importance of trying to keep the CLD offer as local as possible.

The public transport infrastructure makes it difficult to travel across the city and the cost is very expensive unless you have an exemption card or are on certain DWP benefits (to get free travel). I feel stuck here living in Glasgow due to the cost of transport. This makes it harder for potential learners to reach areas where the learning is taking place, especially if this is a specific skill they are trying to develop or a specific learning they are looking to invest time in."

Adult Learner

Similarly, the difficulty of being able to engage with CLD learning in the absence of, or with limited opportunities for, childcare was regularly flagged to me in my discussions with learners. Once again there are clear limits to what I can recommend to help tackle this issue. Budgets are tight and are likely to remain so for some time to come. Nevertheless, I would ask that full consideration is given to the needs of those with child-care (or other caring responsibilities) when Local Authorities are developing and implementing their CLD Plans.

When asked what could improve their CLD experience many learners cited the need for a greater range of provision at no or low cost and access to welcoming and safe local community- based spaces.

The financial context also effectively rules out any prospect to reverse the reduction in Local Authority provided or funded designated community facilities, such as Community Centres. In addition to helping raise awareness of CLD services provided through those centres, their visible presence in the heart of Scotland's communities make accessibility less of a challenge. In the absence of a programme to support and restore these facilities, the next best alternative is for Local Authorities to improve access and availability to local schools for CLD activities and learning. I appreciate there are costs involved, and that some non- CLD, paid-for activities that currently take place in school generate income for Local Authorities. Nevertheless, it strikes me as a considerable missed opportunity for these facilities not to be more routinely available for CLD learning (although it is worth recognising that many CLD learners or potential learners may not have had positive experiences in those school settings). Collaboration with the voluntary sector to access community-owned or managed venues could be the right alternative option in some localities.

Data recently collated by the CLD Standards Council shows that the quantum of Local Authority funding going into CLD is diminishing, as are the numbers of staff employed by Local Authorities to deliver it^[40]. In 2018 the "Working With Scotland's Communities" report by Rocket Science^[41] estimated a CLD Workforce of 21,000 (full and part-time) paid practitioners across Scotland with 3,100 employed by Local Authorities. The most recent source of data on the Local Authority CLD workforce in Scotland is a CLD Standards Council report on Local Authority CLD budget allocations and staffing. The report found that there were 1057.5 FTE CLD staff employed in Local Authorities. This significant level of resource reduction has undoubtedly had an impact on the delivery of provision by Local Authorities and whilst the Third Sector and volunteers have stepped in where possible to meet local need, it has led to patchy provision across Scotland – a postcode lottery. I do not think this is acceptable given that those in need of CLD are some of the most marginalised and vulnerable young people and adults in our society.

As I have said throughout the review, any suggestion of it leading to significant additional funding for Local Authorities or the Third Sector to deliver CLD is unrealistic. New or changed priorities will need to be funded through shifting existing resource or from making that resource work more efficiently.

As can be seen by its actions on the expansion of childcare entitlement, the Scottish Attainment Challenge funding, and on Widening Access to Higher Education, the Scottish Government is committed to supporting people from more disadvantaged backgrounds to realise their full potential. This needs to be taken further. Underpinned by the acceptance that not all young people will flourish in the classroom setting, and that Youth Work can help them to develop the life-skills they will need to 'get on in life'; that to many of those young people the idea of going to University or College simply won't feature on their radar; and, that ongoing access to learning throughout someone's life brings economic, social and personal benefits, the Scottish Government needs to look again at the balance of funding currently supporting learning across the board.

Getting accurate figures for total annual expenditure on CLD – through Local Authorities and Scottish Government – is a challenge, but as I noted earlier, it is safe to say that it is very small relative to spending on schools, Universities and Colleges respectively. We need to be realistic in understanding this is always likely to be the case, but there is an urgent need to reconsider the current weight of funding to ensure CLD learning receives the resource it requires to deliver the positive outcomes we know it can. Whilst recognising how important wider Youth Work activity is in drawing young people into an environment where more tailored learning can be agreed (and the same can be said for Adult Learning), a good first step would be to encourage greater use of Scottish Attainment Challenge/Pupil Equity Fund (SAC/PEF) funding to provide dedicated and professional Youth Work support in our secondary schools.

A frequently raised concern throughout the CLD sector is the tendency in recent years for funding to be project-based and often short- term. The UK Government Multiply funding has provided a funding boost to adult learning across the country and is clearly meeting a need. However, it may not reflect local priorities for Adult Learning, and it remains time-limited. I heard from many stakeholders about how it has led to a refocusing of local attention towards numeracy learning to benefit from the additional funding available. The concern raised was about a short-term focus on a priority that has been set without taking account of local need, which could have longer-term negative impacts on the shape and size of the wider CLD offer.

There is a widespread view that much greater use of single year funding for projects is having a deep detrimental impact on staff recruitment and retention. Delays in agreeing final budget figures will often mean that decisions to recruit or retain staff or volunteers won't be made until well into the financial year. Clearly, this leaves less time for the recruited staff member or volunteer to make the expected contribution to delivering outcomes, and in the knowledge that they will be expected to do so with no or limited guarantees over the project and/or their role being funded into the next financial year. Leaving aside the personal pressure this puts on the individual, the challenges it poses to the organisation in terms of recruitment and retention of qualified/experienced staff and volunteers are obvious. We wouldn't expect those delivering learning in our schools or Colleges, or those providing professional social work support across our communities, to operate on that basis, and I don't see why it should be the case for professional CLD staff delivering learning to some of our most marginalised and disadvantaged learners. Funding to teach our young children how to read and write isn't tied to a specific and time-limited project, so funding to teach older learners how to read and write should be provided on the same basis.

If a shift away from project funding towards additional core funding for Local Authorities to use on local CLD priorities is not possible, then greater efforts need to be made to provide for multi-year project funding – which would allow for the longer-term planning necessary for the longer-term engagement that is central to the CLD approach.

ESOL is a particular concern for me. While I have seen for myself some of the life-changing work providing English language training for our New Scots, it has been clear from the very start of this review that there is an ESOL crisis. As I mentioned earlier in this report, a lack of support to learn English means that New Scots will be limited in how well they can integrate into their new communities. It will impact on the type of work they will be able to do and their ability to engage with service providers, including health services, teachers, housing officers, employers etc.

I was struck by the experience of one young New Scot, who had only been in the country a short time and took a very severe asthma attack late on a Friday night. He knew to dial 111 but his English language skills were such that he wouldn’t have been able to explain his symptoms or underline their severity to the call handler. He was fortunate in being able to reach a friend who had a higher level of English and who was able to call for help on his behalf.

As the example given elsewhere on this page shows, we have a good – if potentially tragic – example of how CLD learning has the potential to not only transform lives, but to save them too.

However, I heard from those working on ESOL that there are thousands of New Scots currently on the waiting list for a place on an ESOL course in Glasgow alone (with circa 400 more being added every month). The scale of the waiting list would suggest that the current approach is simply not fit for purpose. As I understand it, over the years there have been different arrangements for funding community- based ESOL. Since 2018-19 community-based ESOL activity has been funded from core college teaching funds provided through the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) and there are no separate ring-fenced funds. Colleges also deliver ESOL from their core teaching funds.

As outlined in SFC's credit guidance^[42], colleges, local authorities and community partners should discuss the provision for their region and/or community; how local need is met; funding contributions from partners; and set this out in joint delivery plans. This makes it very difficult to be clear on what positive outcomes are being delivered from this investment.

I know from speaking to those involved in delivering ESOL in Colleges that there is some fantastic work going on, including combining ESOL learning with developing vocational skills, such as social care, to maximise the potential job opportunities for the ESOL learner. However, I heard that the current SFC funding model is a constraint on what Colleges can deliver. There needs to be improved transparency on how much of the money provided by SFC to individual Colleges is being spent on ESOL provision, together with the number of ESOL learners who benefit from it and how they benefit.

I heard regularly about the need to adopt a more informed approach to the diversity of ESOL needs. I met a number of New Scots who were highly-educated, sometimes with skills in high-demand in Scotland's economy and public services, who needed accelerated and accredited ESOL learning to reach and prove their knowledge of English at an advanced and/ or technical level. Providing this in a College setting makes good sense. I also met many others who had different degrees of need, and vastly different starting points. Some placed an emphasis on day-to-day skills to be able to talk to neighbours; to speak to their children's teacher; to ring the local GP surgery; to buy a new phone, etc. In some cases, the starting point to learning how to read, write and speak in English was an inability to read and write in the language of their country of origin. If we are to deliver on the promises being made to our New Scots, to support integration from day one, then a much greater priority needs to be given to tackling the issues around ESOL provision.

There needs to be a better balance between formal, structured and accredited opportunities and more informal, day-to-day focused practical learning. The 2022 Adult Learning Strategy^[43] promised a review of the previous ESOL Strategy, and stakeholders have told me of their disappointment that this has not happened. I don't think there is time to wait for that to happen. ESOL needs action without delay. During the review, I learned about the approaches taken by other countries in the support, including language assessment and training, offered to immigrants on their arrival to their new home country. I would encourage the Scottish Government and its New Scots partners to look closely at systems operated in countries like Finland or Sweden and to look to design a similar approach for Scotland^[44].

In the meantime, steps must be taken to better identify and then meet the existing demand for ESOL. We must try to have a clearer picture of the different needs and starting points, and a wider and more varied offer of ESOL provision. Once again, the constrained financial context limits what can be done. In my view, the swiftest and most cost-effective way to inject sufficient additional resource to make a dent in the existing demand is to look at working with strategic partners and mobilising volunteers, potentially drawn from New Scots who have a more advanced level of English, to undergo some basic tutor instruction before leading groups of ESOL learners across Scotland to gain conversational skills needed in basic day to day life.

Central to the CLD approach is the focus on those who are most marginalised and disadvantaged. I have seen excellent examples of projects, with dedicated staff and volunteers, doing just that. Transforming lives and saving lives, and very often using their own lived experiences to make the connections and build the trust to allow them to do so. I've been able to meet many front-line CLD staff and volunteers over the course of this review – all of them inspiring, dedicated and committed, and almost all of them white. I understand that this lack of ethnic diversity has already been flagged by the CLD Standards Council some years ago, so I hope my view on this doesn't come as a surprise. My concern is that the lack of people of colour working in CLD may mean that some groups in Scottish society – from all age groups – are perhaps unaware of what CLD can offer and/or face additional barriers to engaging with it. It's an issue that can't be solved overnight, but the sooner it is tackled the more confident we can be that CLD is seen as accessible to all of Scotland's population.

A final point on the Availability & Accessibility of CLD relates to determining needs to be met. As I set out above, it should continue to be for Local Authorities, fulfilling their statutory obligations under the 2013 CLD Regulations as they evolve in line with recommendations elsewhere in this report, to work with partners to identify local need and to secure provision to meet it (also identifying where it hasn't been possible to meet some need). However, to help them do so, and to ensure that strategic priorities at the national and regional level are informed by the best available evidence, action is needed to build that evidence base.

Learning & Support

Whilst there has been some critical feedback, the overwhelming view expressed by the learners I've engaged with and heard from throughout this process has been a very positive one in terms of the learning and support they have received from CLD staff and volunteers across the country. The latest round of HMIE Progress Visits to Local Authorities present a primarily similar positive picture, with areas of concern being clearly flagged for action and follow-up. This should provide reassurance to Ministers that the standard of CLD learning opportunities – delivered by dedicated CLD staff and volunteers – is generally very good.

In addition to setting out the quality indicators it uses to undertake professional evaluations during inspections and reviews of Local Authorities, the HMIE framework 'How good is our community learning & development?'^[45], is also available for practitioners, managers and leaders to self-assess, evaluate and report on quality and improvement. The framework is helpful, and it should continue to be monitored and updated as required by the planned new independent Inspectorate. The approach of undertaking a programme of inspections and/ or progress visits to all 32 Local Authorities takes considerable time and resource, and the use of the findings do not currently receive any real strategic consideration beyond the Local Authority concerned. It would make more sense, together with a better use of resources, for HMIE to adopt more of a 'risk-based approach' to inspections and/or visits, focusing on where a potential slip in standards might be taking place. This should allow resource to be freed-up to engage in more strategic inspections i.e. looking at issues which may apply across all providers e.g. approaches to integrating minority groups into CLD planning, etc. The primary audience for all HMIE CLD reports should be the proposed Strategic Leadership Group.

Throughout the evidence-gathering phase I heard frequently about how CLD provision is not always delivered or managed by professionally-qualified or suitably-experienced CLD staff or volunteers. The recent pattern of Local Authorities shifting away from having a distinct CLD service towards embedding CLD within other service areas, such as housing, together with the proliferation of job titles for those working in CLD, is not only impacting on the visibility of CLD – it may also be obscuring an inadvertent dilution of professional standards. The situation outwith direct Local Authority provision may be better or worse. We simply don't know enough to be sure.

When is a professional not a professional? Notwithstanding the similar professional qualification requirements, there would appear to be no parity of esteem between CLD professionals and teachers or social workers. It's difficult to know why that is the case, but it does significantly underplay the skills and professional attributes required to be an effective paid CLD worker. It may be a consequence of the greater use of volunteers to provide CLD services – although this, to me, is one of CLD's great strengths. It may be due to the absence of a compulsory professional regulatory body, such as the General Teaching Council for Scotland. It may simply reflect the relative lack of visibility and awareness of what CLD actually is and delivers. It's something that needs to be addressed.

Recent years have seen a reduction in the number of routes for people to become professionally-qualified CLD workers, although the use of Modern Apprenticeships is a welcome development that should be encouraged. I also heard suggestions that the existing provision may not be sufficiently flexible to account for those who want to learn to become qualified whilst working, or to reflect differing entry points for those who may bring significant prior practical experience. A number of practitioners raised doubts over the readiness of newly-qualified CLD professionals to work 'in the field', with some suggesting that the syllabi need to be refreshed.

As already set out above, the relative lack of people of colour working in CLD in Scotland is a concern. The potential for this to be establishing a further hurdle for some of Scotland's communities to access the CLD support that they may need or want should not be ignored.

Pathways & Progression

In a modern policy world where hard and fast measures of progress are usually expected, CLD presents quite acute challenges. The CLD approach takes time. It's learner-driven. It can be non-linear. It may not always be learning for a specific 'purpose'. That doesn't mean progress is not being made or that lives are not being transformed as a result. It just makes it trickier to be able to demonstrate that concisely and comparably.

Hearing direct from those whose lives have been transformed (or even saved) through CLD can really help. It needs to be backed, however, by better and more comparable data across the board, including clarity on inputs like spend and staff resource, and on outcomes and impact delivered.

The entire CLD sector needs to get better at broadcasting its successes. As one practitioner put it to me:

"CLD is the invisible glue that holds so many of our communities together."

Yet, it often doesn't get the recognition it merits. Some of that must be down to the different data collected and/or how it is presented. This needs to change. We need to be clearer on what it is that CLD is setting out to deliver and get better in gathering the data to show if expected outcomes are indeed being delivered. In short, there's an urgent need for an overall CLD shared outcomes and measurement framework. This doesn't need to be built from scratch, with the existing National Youth Work Outcomes and Skills Framework^[46] and the KPI data collected by CLD Managers Scotland providing a very good starting point for a national CLD framework that can be adapted to include adult and family learning.

I understand that there is no single system used by Local Authorities to record progress by individual learners or towards agreed overall outcomes. That really doesn't help in being able to tell if CLD across the country is doing what we know it can do. Sunk costs in the systems being used by Local Authorities clearly limit any suggestion to move immediately towards a single system used by all. Nevertheless, I am hopeful that this shouldn't be an insurmountable obstacle to getting greater consistency in recording and reporting once a shared outcomes and measurement framework is agreed.

The evidence I've heard in recent months would suggest that those learners who feel ready and want to move on to do new or more advanced learning, or to embark on employability support or find work, usually get the help and support they need to allow them to do so. However, the challenges of availability and accessibility, already set out above, may limit what new CLD learning is on offer. For others, who are moving into a College or a workplace setting, the absence of the support provided by CLD professionals and the flexibilities of CLD learning may prove challenging. There are also challenges around recognition and acceptance of awards received during the CLD learning.

There would appear to be scope for more to be done to better map those awards to the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework, and for more flexible micro-credentials that can be recorded to reflect personal attributes and achievements. These potential issues add to the more practical issues around availability and cost of transport, etc. We need to ensure that all learners across Scotland have an opportunity to fulfil their potential while contributing their talents which should be recognised.

Specifically, on ESOL, we need to better recognise that there are many highly-skilled New Scots whose skills and experience are currently going to waste. Providing them with the right opportunities to get their English language skills to the appropriate levels is absolutely essential, but so is the early identification of those skills, which can then be backed by a tailored approach to prepare for them to be used in and for Scotland's economy and society.

Where do we want to be?

It's usually helpful to know your destination before you plot the next stages on your journey. With this in mind, below I suggest some outcomes, towards which the recommendations and key actions in this report should assist in taking us.

By 2026:

• There is a clearly discernible strategic direction being set for CLD, covering all its elements, at both the national and sub- national levels;
• Learners and potential learners are aware of the opportunities presented by CLD, and can access those that they wish to undertake in a way that meets their needs;
• The design and delivery of CLD strategies and plans is informed by input sought from learners and potential learners;
• CLD enjoys good recognition amongst learners, potential learners, decision-makers and budget-holders as an approach to tackling a wide range of (sometimes inter- related) social and educational challenges, which spans three core elements – Youth Work, Adult Learning (including ESOL and family learning), and Community Development/Empowerment;
• Those involved in CLD are fully aware of the outcomes they are setting out to deliver;
• There is a consistent approach to gathering data and reporting on outcomes which allows for an overall national picture to become clear;
• That learner progress and awards can be better mapped to the Scottish Credit & Qualifications Framework;
• That decision-makers, budget-holders and planners have a comprehensive picture of the need for CLD, and are regularly horizon- scanning to be well-placed to adapt should that become necessary;
• Roles and responsibilities, including accountability, are clearly established and transparently set out, with the legislative underpinning for CLD supporting this as required;
• CLD workers and volunteers are widely- recognised as effectively qualified, experienced and trained, with qualified CLD staff enjoying parity of esteem with similarly qualified counterparts, such as teachers and social workers; and
• That there is a recognised career pathway – mapped to qualifications – for those working in CLD, including the opportunity to move into senior education management roles within Local Authorities. And also for volunteers who wish to move into CLD as a career.

By the end of the next Scottish Parliament:

• There is a steady pipeline of people entering the CLD workforce, both as staff and volunteers, which reflects an increasingly diverse Scottish population;
• There is a more systematic approach to improving learners' and potential learners' awareness of and accessibility to CLD learning opportunities;
• There is a greater consistency across CLD providers in terms of delivery and workforce planning, with regular opportunities for sharing and learning from good practice across the country;
• Project and programme delivery plans for CLD activities have the stability and predictability of funding to allow them to be sure that the medium to longer-term interventions often required in CLD can be delivered; and
• That CLD's role within Scotland's overall Lifelong Learning system of education is fully recognised and is reflected in terms of the balance of government spending.

How do we get to where we want to go?

Having listened widely to learners, stakeholders, practitioners and decision- makers, and considered the evidence gathered and presented in the documents accompanying this report, I am making recommendations, with related priority actions, in six key areas.

1. Leadership and Structures

The sense of fragmentation, inconsistency, drift and decline needs to be addressed urgently.

In my view there is a requirement for sustained strategic leadership, working to set out and deliver a clear, learner-centred, vision of what CLD is expected to do to provide the best outcomes for Scotland's communities and the individuals who make them up.

Recommendation 1.1

• By Autumn 2024, the Scottish Government and CoSLA should establish a joint CLD Strategic Leadership Group (SLG).
  • To meet quarterly as a minimum;
  • Alternately chaired by lead Scottish Government Minister and the designated CoSLA lead;
  • Membership determined by Scottish Government and CoSLA, with all efforts made to ensure it covers the breadth of the CLD offer and establishes an associated Equalities Forum;
  • It should be an action-focused group;
  • It should be required to meet with a cross- section of CLD learners at least once every year to hear their views directly from them; and
  • A key goal for the group should be to consider how the structures emerging at the regional level, for example those relating to City and Region Growth Deals, could help in developing a more coordinated and integrated system of information/best practice sharing and decision-making for CLD planning and delivery.

Learning: For All. For Life. A report from the Independent Review of Community Learning and Development (CLD)

Recommendation 1.2

• The work of the SLG should be supported by a working-level CLDStrategicDelivery Group (SDG).
  • Meets more frequently than the Strategic Leadership Group and ensures actions are progressed in-between meetings of the Strategic Leadership Group;
  • This should be a delivery focused group; and
  • It should be required to meet with a cross- section of CLD learners at least twice every year to hear their views directly from them.

Recommendation 1.3

• CoSLA and the Scottish Government need to reconsider current arrangements supporting CLD policy and delivery.
  • In order to support the work of the SLG and SDG;
  • Improve internal coordination and join- up, including ensuring the community development element of CLD is fully integrated in the work of both groups; and
  • In the spirit of the Verity House Agreement, full consideration should be given to the secretariat and support team for the groups being a joint Scottish Government/CoSLA one.

Recommendation 1.4

• CoSLA should initiate and lead a process to improve consistency in terms of where CLD is situated within Local Authority structures across all 32 Local Authorities.

Recommendation 1.5

• The CLD Standards Council shouldbesupportedtotransitiontowardsan independent status more akin to the General Teaching Council Scotland.

Recommendation 1.6

• Ministers should commit to providing regular reports to the Scottish Parliament about follow-up to this Review.
  • The aim should be for the first such report to reach the Parliament by end June 2025.

2. Overarching Policy Narrative

As I have highlighted throughout this report, there is a pressing need for the Scottish Government to take the findings from the many recent inter-related reviews in the education policy space, and to use them to synthesise a clear statement of what it wants in a true Life- long Learning system. This can be helpful in paving the way for a clearer statement of the role that the Scottish Government expects CLD to play within that system.

Recommendation 2.1

• The Scottish Government should develop and communicate a clear and cohesive policynarrativeonLife-longLearning.
  • It should build upon the Purpose and Principles work for Post-School Education and Skills but should also cover learning at earlier stages in life and beyond Further and Higher Education.

Recommendation 2.2

• Informed by and consistent with the policy narrative recommended above, the Scottish Government should develop and communicate a clear Statement of Strategic Intent for CLD.
  • Developed with input from the Strategic Leadership Group and informed by the evidence presented throughout this review;
  • It should build upon strategic priorities across all dimensions of CLD (drawing on prior work relating to the Adult Learning Strategy, Youth Work Strategy, Community Development and the New Scots Strategy); and
  • This should include a commitment to work towards delivering by the end of the next Parliament an entitlement to Adult Learning and Youth Work.

3. Focus on Delivery

There is much that needs to be done, but not all of it can be done at once. Nevertheless, it will be important to develop and set-out a plan which shows what steps will be taken, and when, to deliver the changes required to ensure CLD continues to deliver positive outcomes.

ESOL needs to be a priority.

Recommendation 3.1

• By the end of 2024, the Strategic Leadership Group should agree and publish a detailed, prioritised and timed Delivery Plan, with the following key priorities:
  • Developing a Routemap to amend the 2013 CLD Regulations in order to:
    • improve accountability and consistency by providing greater clarity on responsibilities across Local Authorities and Third Sector delivery partners;
    • include a requirement for local CLD Plans to be informed and monitored by input received directly from learners; and
    • set some minimum standards or requirements for CLD in Local Authorities e.g. % of education spend and/or ratio of staff to population.
  • Early identification of key actions required to deliver on strategic priorities across all dimensions of CLD, including community development, to deliver positive outcomes for learners;
  • The approach to be followed for the Strategic Leadership Group and Strategic Delivery Group to hear regularly and directly from learners, and from front-line practitioners, about their experiences to inform strategic decision-making and delivery plans;
  • Developing a cost-effective plan to publicise and raise general awareness of CLD and the learning offer, together with the positive outcomes it delivers; and
  • Considering ways to encourage wider interest in CLD across the Scottish Parliament e.g. supporting a cross-party group on CLD.

Recommendation 3.2

• The Scottish Government working alongside New Scots partners, Colleges and Local Authorities needs to take immediate action to tackle the current ESOL crisis, including:
  • Reintroducing ring-fencing for ESOL funding provided by SFC to Colleges, at a level consistent with current and predicted demand;
  • Using some of the funding provided to Colleges in 2024-25 to undertake a programme of urgent needs assessment for New Scots currently on ESOL waiting lists (or in the early stages of ESOL learning), and potentially sourcing a self- assessment online test to assist in tackling the backlog;
  • Work with existing voluntary ESOL providers and CLD Standards Council to develop a delivery model for new migrants to become equipped with basic, practical knowledge of the English language, related to everyday activities. This could potentially use volunteers and mentors from established New Scots from within existing networks already in communities;
  • The Scottish Government, working with its New Scots partners, should look closely at systems put in place by countries such as Finland or Sweden to help design an approach to providing support offered to New Scots, including language assessment and training;
  • Scottish Government and ESOL partners working intensively with SDS and other relevant bodies should develop a better system for the early identification of New Scots with 'in demand' qualifications, skills and experience to provide tailored support to them being fast-tracked to work in their professional roles; and
  • The CLD Strategic Leadership Group should be highlighting and sharing good practice of those employers offering or supporting ESOL learning for those with skills in high demand.

4. Budgets and Funding

I've been clear to learners, practitioners and stakeholders throughout this review about the need to be realistic about the likelihood of significant additional funding being injected into CLD in the short-term. Nevertheless, it will be important to consider what can be done now to address some of the long-standing budget and funding challenges across the sector.

Recommendation 4.1

• The Scottish Government should undertake an urgent and overdue reassessment of the current balance of spending across all dimensions of learning in Scotland:
  • It should be informed by the overarching true Life-long Learning policy narrative recommended above;
  • It should align with the recommendation that the Statement of Strategic Intent should include a commitment to an entitlement to Adult Learning (including ESOL) and Youth Work; and
  • An early and helpful step would be to encourage greater use of SAC/PEF funding to provide dedicated and professional Youth Work support in our secondary schools.

Recommendation 4.2

• Consistent with the Verity House Agreement, the Scottish Government and CoSLA should work together to identify indicative allocations for Local Authority spendon CLD.

Recommendation 4.3

• Wherever possible, funding should be part of core budgets rather than project related. If this is not possible, then project funding should be provided over a multi-year period, with an explanation provided if that is not the case.

5. Developing the Workforce and Standards

The CLD professionals and volunteers, working with people facing the biggest challenges, deserve better recognition than they currently enjoy. For those who are qualified CLD professionals, there is a pressing need to ensure parity of esteem with similarly-qualified professionals in related fields. As Scotland's population continues to change, there is a need for the CLD workforce to change with it.

Recommendation 5.1

• The Scottish Government should appoint a Chief Adviser on Community Learning & Development:
  • To undertake a similar role to the Chief Social Work Adviser i.e. advising Ministers and policy teams with an interest in, or responsibility for, aspects of CLD services and practice.

Recommendation 5.2

• The CLD Standards Council should lead work to develop a CLD Workforce Plan for consideration by the Strategic Leadership Group. It should consider:
  • Identifying a standardised approach to grading and job titles for those working in CLD roles, including across the wider voluntary sector;
  • Developing a programme of outreach to encourage more people of colour to consider a career in CLD or to become volunteers (with a particular early emphasis on supporting community-based ESOL activities in line with the recommendation above);
  • If budget can be found, putting in place a bursary scheme to support people of colour to train for careers in CLD;
  • Reviewing existing routes to professional status in CLD, with a view to ensuring that the offer is fit for the future;
  • Clarifying and, where possible, simplifying professional job roles and career paths;
  • A role for the Standards Council in setting and monitoring minimum Continuous Professional Development (CPD) requirements for CLD professionals and volunteers; and
  • Exploring the possibility of mutual learning exchanges being built into CPD requirements for CLD professionals, teachers and social workers.

Recommendation 5.3

• There should be a progressive requirement for all those working or volunteering in CLD roles to be members of the CLD Standards Council:
  • With differing types of membership available to account for the continued importance of volunteers and to reflect the need to take prior experience into account.

Recommendation 5.4

• Consideration of HMIE CLD inspection report findings should be a standing item on the Strategic Leadership Group agenda.

6. Demonstrating Impact

If anyone, after reading this report, still harbours doubts about the life-changing nature of CLD, I would strongly encourage them to sit down and listen to the learners whose lives are changed for the better (or have been saved).

Many of the practitioners I heard from accepted that CLD needs to get better at telling its stories and demonstrating impact. Collectively, we need to get better at recognising and celebrating what CLD does.

Recommendation 6.1

• The Scottish Government should fund Scotland's participation in the OECD International Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC):
  • Unless we know the scale of the challenge, we won't know where resources need to be directed.

Recommendation 6.2

• Existing outcome measures, including the Youth Work National Outcomes and Skills Framework and the CLD managers Scotland KPI data, should be used as the basis to develop a shared CLD Outcomes and Measurement Framework for use across the sector:
  • This will require consideration of what data needs to be consistently gathered to show progress on delivering outcomes.

Recommendation 6.3

• There should be an annual celebration of CLD successes, in the shape of a CLD Annual Report and CLD Awards event:
  • To recognise achievement from learners and performance from staff and volunteers; and
  • This could potentially become part of an annual Celebrating Community Learning & Development Week.