« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Analysis of survey data
Comparison of 2007 figures with 2006 survey results.
36. Figures for provision by local authorities for 2006 and 2007 are directly comparable. It is not possible to compare non local authority returns because few of the same organizations responded in both years. A comparison of figures for local authority provision is given below. As highlighted elsewhere in this report, these should be treated with some caution.
- Q1: National priority one: achievement through learning for adults. The 2007 figures show an increase of nearly 6000 (10%) community based adult learning opportunities compared to 2006.
- Q2: National priority two: achievement through learning for young people. The 2007 figures show a decrease of just over 5000 (6%) in community based youth work opportunities accessed compared to 2006.
- Q3: National priority three: achievement through building community capacity. The 2007 figures show a decrease of just over 1000 (22%) in the number of community groups or organisations which received community development, community work or community capacity building support directly from local authority staff or volunteers, during the reporting period.
Local Authority Returns 2007
37. Based on the survey data and the evaluations, we have come to the following conclusions regarding the data:
- Where there are significant differences between the figures for individual local authorities for 2006 and 2007, either amendments or plausible reasons for this were given by the responsible Lead Officer.
- It is apparent from the increased number of departments involved that local authorities continue to develop the comprehensiveness of their returns.
- It is not generally possible to read much from the changes in the figures in the early years of the survey. A number of sweeps of the survey would be needed to build up information on trends over time.
- It appears likely that the figures for community capacity building are an exception to this. The total number of community groups reported to have received support from local authority staff in the 2007 survey week is approximately 20% less in comparison to both the 2006 and 2005 surveys. Comments on several returns and from lead officers during the quality assurance process indicated that there had been a reduction in such provision by their local authority. This evidence raises important questions in relation to the scale of community capacity building activity being delivered through CLD partnerships.
38. Feedback from the evaluation and quality assurance process indicated that in general the individual local authorities were confident in the robustness of the data provided for delivery directly by them. A significant number of local authorities had made efforts to collect information from a wider range of departments (beyond 'core' CLD services) indicating that there is commitment to improving the depth and quality of the data collected on local authority provision.
39. There was a significant degree of variation in how 'department' had been interpreted by different local authorities but the range of departments mentioned in returns gives a clear indication that CLD opportunities and support are now delivered in a range of ways by local authorities:
- Community based learning opportunities for adults were reported to be delivered by 82 different departments (an average of 2.6 across the 32 LA returns). In 2006, this was 71, (an average of 2.2 across 32 LA returns).
- Youth work opportunities were reported to be delivered by 65 different departments (an average of 2.0 across the 32 returns). In 2006, this was 61, (an average of 1.9 across 32 LA returns).
- Community capacity building support was reported as being provided by 65 different departments (an average of 2.0 across the 32 returns). In 2006, this was 66, an average of 2.1 across 32 LA returns.
Non- Local Authority Partners' returns 2007
40. The limited number of returns in respect of delivery by non-local authority CLD partners severely limits the usefulness of this data as the basis for forming a robust national picture.
41. Year on year comparison between the participating non-local authority organisations shows that there was only a small proportion that made returns in both the 2006 and 2007 surveys. It is therefore impossible to compare the numbers in a meaningful way.
42. In advance of the data collection, CLD partnership lead officers were asked to provide a list of the partners to which they would pass the invitation to take part. In total, 30 lead officers provided this information and they indicated that they would be passing the invitation on to 659 partners (an average of 20.6 per partnership). The number of partners invited ranged from 4 to 124.
43. Ninety five returns were received from non-local authority partners throughout Scotland. Three returns came from partnerships that had not provided a list of partners prior to the survey. The response rate was therefore 14.4% of the 659 partners that we know were invited to take part. The number of responses ranged from no partners in two areas where we know invitations were issued, to a maximum of 18 partners in one area. This is an average of 3.4 responses per partnership.
44. The majority of non-local authority responses (77.9%) came from voluntary sector organisations; the next largest sector was colleges and universities with 14.7% of responses; the "other statutory" sector was the smallest, with 7.4% of responses.
45. There was an increase in the number of responses from voluntary organisations, up from 50 in 2006 to 74 in 2007. However, there was a significant reduction in the number of organisations in the "other statutory" category responding to the survey; 16 responses in 2006, compared to 7 responses in 2007.
Acceptable uses of the information
46. The data have been collected with the aim of establishing Scotland-level counts. Although the data have been collected at local authority level they do not support comparisons between local authorities. The activity week was selected as being a random typical week. We would therefore expect random variations between areas in the numbers of activities delivered. Across the country we would expect these random variations to broadly even out, allowing us to use the national figure.
47. Comparison between the 2006 and 2007 figures (for local authority delivery only) appears to bear this out. Though individual figures have fluctuated, at Scotland level, they are broadly similar. Further sweeps of the survey will be needed to establish trends over time and allow for any random variation from year to year.
48. The data collected by individual authorities can be used to inform their own work as they are in a position to understand the local factors impacting on their activity. It is anticipated that year on year data within a council area can be used locally given the caveat that any changes are interpreted within the context of the local environment.
« Previous | Contents | Next »