Evaluating the Impact of CLD on

National and Local Outcomes

Glenys Watt

15 November 2011

• Increasingly important to evidence the outcomes of CLD

• Local and national levels

• What is happening and where are the gaps?

Context

• inform policy development and implementation with improved evidence on the impact of CLD

• create a baseline for further improvement of the evidence base for policy development and implementation in CLD

• suggest models for future impact evaluation

Purpose

• Electronic survey: 26 returns

• In-depth analysis in nine areas

• Advisory group

Methods

• Very similar provision and partners (local authority, churches, uniformed organisations and voluntary sector)

• 24 out of 25 returns said outcomes had been set; 20 have a plan linked to the SOA outcomes

• Indicators often quantitative

• Some examples of more outcome-focused evidence gathering

• Range of MIS used for storage of evidence

• Variety of ways evidence is used

• Barriers: resources and restructuring

Analysis: Youthwork

• Very similar provision and partners (local authority, FE and voluntary sector)

• 23 out of 24 returns said outcomes had been set; 20 have a plan linking adult learning to the SOA

• Quantitative and qualitative evidence gathered: progression and achievement measured

• Some evidence gathered across partners

• Barriers: focus on evidencing progress and how best this is done

• Some practical progress being made

Analysis: Adult learning

• More diverse provision and partners (local authority, health and voluntary sector)

• 23 out of 26 returns said outcomes had been set; 18 have a plan linking CCB to the SOA

• Quantitative evidence gathered: clearly harder to gather qualitative evidence

• Some evidence gathered across partners

• Barriers: focus on evidencing progress and how best this is done; establishing a baseline

• Having a clear direction for CCB

Analysis: Community Capacity Building

Analysis: In-depth areas

• Provision and partners

- greatest difference is in CCB- health as a partner in some areas not others

• Structures and planning

- where CLD sits; one team or three- plethora of plans but no CLD plan in some areas

• Management of information and evidence

- has been given attention- importance of staff training and capacity building

Analysis: In-depth areas

• Outcome-focused planning

- real progress- but still “outcomes” that are not outcomes- SOAs often want quantitative evidence

• Partners

- patchy involvement in evidence gathering- links to health of CLD Partnerships

• Interesting practice

Reflections and Recommendations

• Do we want to see greater consistency across Scotland in evidencing impact of CLD? How can this be supported?

• Do we want to evidence the impact as a whole entity or is it enough to evidence the three elements separately?

• Do we want impact to be evidenced across the partners?

• Is the SOA the best way to capture the qualitative impact of CLD?

• How do areas which are further behind with evidencing impact get supported?

Telephone: 0131 335 3700Email: admin@blakestevenson.co.uk