4.3. CRS Outcomes in Local Service Design and Delivery

Figure 2: Example of mapping outcomes from the School Age Childcare Policy to the outcomes in the Covid Recovery Strategy

Figure 3: Example of mapping outcomes from a LOIP to the outcomes in the Covid Recovery Strategy

Targeted groups of children are healthier and have increased wellbeing

Readiness to learn is increased for targeted groups of children

Adverse effects of living in poverty are reduced for targeted groups of children

Families have reduced household living costs

Parents’ opportunities to take up work, training or study increase Wellbeing of Children and Young People

Financial Security for Low Income Households

Good, Green Jobs and Fair Work

Minority ethnic families; Families with a disabled adult or child; Families with young parents; Larger families with three or more children; and Families with a child under one year old). Two of the policy areas (110,000 affordable homes and Community Wealth Building Plan) are designed to realise a universal benefit, rather than specific groups, although CRS targets groups are expected to benefit. Another policy, the Green Jobs Fund, is aimed at creation of good green jobs and hence is not targeted at specific demographic groups.

4.3. CRS Outcomes in Local Service Design and Delivery

All 20 CPPs that were engaged in the course of evidence gathering agreed that the three main outcomes in the CRS are aligned to a degree with their own local plans. However, this alignment was often unintentional, with some areas feeding back that they felt as though the national strategy was constrained to three main policy areas that already exist elsewhere. It was commonly noted that while the broad aims of the outcomes could be mapped locally, there were often different articulations in local plans. An example is given below:

Health and Wellbeing Reduce inequalities by targeted support to improve individual, family and community health and wellbeing and improving access to financial services

Economy and Skills Address the causes and effects of poverty through a strong local economy and skills base Wellbeing of Children and Young People

Financial Security for Low Income Households

Climate Change Reduce inequalities by targeted support to improve individual, family and community health and wellbeing and improving access ro financial services Good Green Jobs and Fair Work

Most local authorities published their own recovery plans early in the pandemic, with many being published in summer 2020. As such, most CPP/local authority recovery plans were mostly published before the CRS. In most cases CPPs and local authorities have not published separate recovery plans post October 2021. However, in a small number of cases, CPPs were found to have embedded their Recovery priorities into other planning frameworks (including LOIPs and Community Plans) in an effort to mainstream recovery across all work.

While evidence suggests broad alignment of the intentions of the CRS outcomes with those articulated locally, outcomes are prioritised differently across CPPs and within LOIPs. It is reported by CPPs that this local prioritisation is most often based on community engagement, understanding of local needs and circumstances. It was noted that this method of local prioritisation and understanding of need is a duty on local areas, required by the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015, and the Local Government in Scotland Act (2003).

It was highlighted by CPPs that alongside their requirement to build priorities through community engagement, there exists a wide range of national priority outcomes often results in a complicated landscape in relation to delivery. There exist a range of national outcomes which sit out with the CRS, in relation to areas such as Net Zero and economic development, which have been prioritised both nationally and locally and therefore represent areas of significant focus in local areas.

Of the three outcomes as articulated in the CRS, the one which was found to have the least alignment with local plans and activity was on the concept of ‘Green Jobs’. This was found to be locally more broadly being pursued as a subset of broader employability activities.

Around half of all CPPs engaged reflected that mental health and wellbeing outcomes/actions are missing or underrepresented in the CRS, and that this was a key feature of their own plans.

Addressing the climate emergency and the move towards Net Zero was also commonly cited as a key priority locally that was felt to be underrepresented in the CRS.

It was also noted, almost universally amongst CPPs from remote and rural local authority areas, that digital inclusion was a key feature of local planning. The requirement during Covid to work from home meant the model for service delivery was electronic, often not accessible to the people in most need. Digital inclusion is therefore a key priority in many local areas and is felt to be underrepresented in the CRS.

The stated outcomes/priorities as stated in various publications by different councils were examined. These documents, including LOIPs, Council Plans, Corporate Strategies and Recovery and Renewal Plans, have all been published after the CRS. Research showed that (a) many of the outcomes/priorities articulated are similar to those identified in the CRS, though articulated differently, and (b) there are some outcomes/priorities being prioritised locally that are not at the forefront of the CRS (climate change emergency, digital inclusion, mental health and wellbeing).