Return to Agenda

Division(s): All

ITEM LC13

LEARNING & CULTURE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE -
2 DECEMBER 2003

GOVERNANCE OF OXFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL ADULT AND COMMUNITY LEARNING SERVICE

Report by Head of Adult & Community Learning

  1. The introduction to Adult Learning Plan approved by Learning and Culture Executive in May 2003 includes these comments in the required paragraph on accountability and governance:

    2. The OCC Service is accountable to the County Council via the Executive and the Learning and Culture Scrutiny Committee.

    Local programmes for curriculum areas other than Countywide services (Adult Basic Skills, Guidance, Learning Disabilities, some Local Learning Centre Development and special outreach programmes) are governed by Community Education Committees (CECs) with representation for learners, local business, partner agencies, and schools closely involved with provision. It is service policy to encourage mergers when neighbouring committees wish to do so or where membership of CECs is considered too small or unrepresentative, and some have done so. The Service is working to reduce the number, by agreement.

    The Service is conscious that the current pace of change requires a strong element of central strategic decision-making, and will brief the Executive Member for Learning and Culture, and work towards a clearer definition of governance at County Council and local levels. We hope to use NIACE and local resources to refine the governance of the service, and we expect that there will be opportunities to debate locally any forthcoming national guidance on the governance of adult learning.

  2. This paper, together with the attached consultation document (download as .rtf file), briefs the Learning and Culture Scrutiny Committee on the current consultation about options for countywide governance of Adult and Community Learning, and invites the Committee to contribute their views on the issues, as part of that consultation.

  3. The National Institute for Adult and Continuing Education (NIACE) consultancy took place in July and gave Oxfordshire managers, both central and local, an overview of current practice and trends elsewhere, and an analysis of the difference between County Council service needs and those of, for instance, further education colleges. It focussed on the differences between governance, management and consultation or advice, and on the need to have affordable governance, whose value exceeds the time taken to service it. And by analysing governance and consultation in the light of existing local authority structures, it showed which functions in Oxfordshire were met by Executive and Scrutiny, and which were appropriately located elsewhere or were weak.

  4. An additional element can be added to the context since that plan was approved. The Adult Learning Inspectorate has now inspected a number of local authority Adult Learning services, and delivered a general ‘could do better’ message to a sector that has some 1.7 million learners, with many specific criticisms that are relevant to governance. (Oxfordshire can expect whole service inspection from Summer 04 onwards).

  5. The Chief Inspector gave this summary of inspectors’ initial impression:

    6. The traditional strengths of ACL - enthusiastic and sometimes extraordinary teaching – are evident, but the service often sits uneasily among local priorities and its quality is often random rather than managed for continuous improvement…

    We hope to see steadily rising standards, with a more consistently professional service taking a planned role in local provision, challenged and supported by the LSC.

  6. The conclusion of managers involved in the consultancy and in regular meetings of Community Education Committees and of their chairs, is that partial local governance with the current constitution for those Committees, is now unsustainable, even if more CEC mergers take place.

  7. The attached consultation paper analyses the strengths and weaknesses of the current arrangements in Oxfordshire, and proposes options. All but the status quo option would make clear that there is single governance of the service, but that the voice of stakeholders – learners, the voluntary and community sector, employers and other ACL providers – will actively be sought, and that it will inform decisions. A draft of the consultation document was discussed with Chairs of Community Education Committees on 6 October, and the draft revised at Learning and Culture Executive Briefing on 24 October and subsequently. The text attached has now been circulated to service staff and Community Education Committees, staff, to heads and chairs of governors of schools used for adult and community learning, and to main partner organisations. An open information and consultation meeting is to be held at the Cricket Road Centre on Monday 24 November from 7 to 9 p.m..

  8. The timetable for consultation envisages a recommendation being made to the Executive at the meeting on 17February 2004, which will incorporate comments from Scrutiny, with implementation of any change in the period 1 April to 1 September 2004.

  9. Additional timetable considerations are that a) the Learning and Skills Council requires Provider Mission Reviews to be completed by 31 April 2004, or by a date that fits with the local Strategic Area Review timetable, and b) LSC priorities and funding, together with changes in learner demand, also drive change in the ACL service’s staffing structure.

  10. The final responsibility for agreeing the ACL service mission lies with its governing body, after discussion with the LSC. The LSC briefing paper notes that:

Discussion of mission should lead to wider consideration of the provider’s aims and objectives, their strengths and how these fit with meeting needs and improving choice within the local area-wide network of LSC-funded provision….As a minimum it is recommended that it:

    • Involves governors or boards of providers

    • Takes into account the views of customers (learners, employers, and the community)

    • Focuses on organisational strengths and weaknesses (self-assessment and inspection reports)

    • Takes into account local, regional, sectoral and national priorities (local LSCs’ strategic plans, outcomes of Strategic Area Reviews and inspections

    • Demonstrates inclusion, equality and diversity

  1. Any review of the ACL service mission should equally, address the County Council’s priorities for the services it manages and funds via partners.

  2. The Scrutiny Committee is invited to:

          1. comment on the questions raised in the governance consultation paper; and

          2. note that a mission review, and a review of the allocation of staffing to curriculum, geographical, and target learner responsibilities, will be undertaken to a slightly later timetable.

MARI PRICHARD
Head of Adult and Community Learning

Background Papers: Adult Learning Inspectorate Common Inspection Format (sections on leadership and management)

Presentation by David Sherlock, Adult Learning Inspectorate Chief Inspector, on the findings of 45 Adult and Community Learning (including 34 Local Authority) inspections in 2002-3 – reported in Adults Learning Magazine (pub NIACE) September issue p29; copy of his slide presentation also available

Notes of one-day consultancy on governance of Local Authority Adult Learning by specialist officer from the National Institute of Adult and Continuing Education, with reference to Further Education National Training Organisation standards for Governance

LSC Guidance Notes on Provider Mission Reviews, July 200

Contact officers:
Mari Prichard, Head of Adult and Community Learning Tel. (01865) 815153
Suzanne Bridgewater, Adult and Community Learning Officer Tel. (01865) 815232

November 2003

Return to TOP