Research and analysis

Multiply deep dive research: Delivering adult numeracy skills in Wales

Published 3 December 2025

Applies to Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales

Executive summary

Multiply Deep Dive: Wrexham

Introduction

Summary of Multiply

• Multiply was a 3 year, up to £559 million programme, designed to improve the functional numeracy skills of adults across the UK.
• This funding enabled Lead Local Authorities (LAs) to develop local solutions to improve the functional maths skills of adults.
• Multiply included flexibilities that enabled the development of new and innovative projects, which often contextualised numeracy in the real world, enabling learners to develop and apply numeracy skills in a novel way.
• In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Multiply funding was also available to address the numeracy needs of 16- to 19-year-olds at risk of being Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET).

Research aims and context

This research builds on a report commissioned by Wrexham County Borough Council (WCBC) to understand the design, delivery and outcomes of Multiply up to December 2024^{[footnote 1]}. Our research further addresses the process of developing and delivering Multiply in Wrexham (with a greater focus on how the council built internal partnerships to deliver this), the experience of specific organisations in delivering interventions and investigates the outputs and outcomes of the programme (including additional/unexpected outcomes).

A series of 9 qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 interviewees, including staff at WCBC and delivery partners from education and business sectors.

Place

Wales was allocated a total of £101 million Multiply funding and each lead LA developed their own programme of Multiply projects. Wrexham received £3 million in Multiply funding, equating to £36.68 per head of the adult population.

Wrexham delivered successfully and accessed an additional £213,527 in the final 3 months of delivery (later extended to 6 months) from North Wales regional underspend.

Key findings

Design

Flexible funding parameters helped provide additionality to projects which could not be solely funded by other sources which had more rigid conditions (e.g. Adult Community Learning funding).

The multi-disciplinary team set up within the council helped break down siloed working, and combined with a creative and “outside the box” mindset, helped to provide openness to a range of business, education and community-based projects.

Varying forms of engagement (a webinar, leafletting, social media) were used to attract people to courses, allowing for more subtle ways to engage “hard-to-reach” groups.

Delivery

Strong leadership from WCBC allowed projects to deliver effectively and beyond the original scope of the programme. Delivery was supported by an engaged business and education sector in Wrexham.

Continuous and open communication between WCBC and delivery partners helped to create supportive relationships.

Existing partnerships were key to delivering to short timescales; while new organisations successfully delivered for WCBC, there was perceived to be more risk working with unfamiliar partners and the need for closer assurance.

The design of different projects was adapted through delivery; learning about what worked or didn’t was built into future sessions where appropriate.

Outcomes

Overall, the Wrexham Multiply programme was successful in achieving and outperforming all but one formal output and outcome metric.

Almost 20 times the planned number of courses were run locally, attracting over 1000 more people to courses and events than anticipated.

107 courses were developed with employers, suggesting good collaboration with businesses, and 465 adults achieved maths qualifications up to and including Level 2 equivalent, 111% of the target figure.

Multiply projects had good take up across a broad range of beneficiaries, including family learning, delivery to prisoners and businesses across Wrexham; some beneficiaries were not included or counted in delivery due to the requirement to have a Wrexham postcode.

Additional individual outcomes were reported including building the confidence of adults to reengage with education and learning and supporting adults and children through family learning to improve the wider family relationship.

Local partnerships between delivery partners were reported to be new or deepened, and Multiply was perceived to have supported smaller organisations to create new or refined programmes which improved their business offer.

Lessons and recommendations

Partnerships: A multi-disciplinary and cross-council model worked to achieve outcomes for a range of beneficiaries in one programme. WCBC should consider how to build on this model going forward.

Clear guidance: Provision of clear guidance about the definition of beneficiaries should be given, considering all those who contribute to local economies.

Flexibility in fund design and delivery enables the potential for effective delivery, where funding can be repurposed to deliver more where areas are more successful. This flexibility should be embedded in future similar funds.

1. Introduction

1.1. Multiply was a 3-year programme, delivering up to £559 million to improve the functional numeracy skills of adults across the UK. The programme ran from 2022 to 2025 and was delivered alongside the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF).

1.2. Multiply was delivered by Lead Local Authorities (LAs) in Scotland and Wales, by MHCLG in Northern Ireland and by the Department for Education in England, with MHCLG transferring funding to cover costs.

1.3. This funding enabled lead LAs to develop initiatives that addressed local numeracy needs, boosted people’s ability to use maths in their everyday life and supported learners to achieve a numeracy qualification. Multiply included flexibilities that enabled the development of new and innovative projects, which often contextualised numeracy in the real world, enabling learners to develop and apply numeracy skills in a novel way.

1.4. Multiply interventions were targeted at adults (19+) who had not previously attained a Level 2/ SCQF Level 5 or higher maths qualification. These learners could have a specific numeracy need for work progression or want to improve their numeracy skills to help everyday living. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, where the school leaving age is 16, Multiply funding could also be used to support to 16- to 19-year-olds at risk of becoming Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEETs)^{[footnote 2]}.

1.5. Multiply guidance encouraged lead LAs to develop interventions in partnership with providers and employers, as well as other partners in their local area to maximise value for money and ensure delivery of effective learner solutions.

1.6. This report presents the findings of a deep dive into the design and delivery of Multiply interventions and initiatives in Wrexham, Wales. The report identifies the successes and challenges experienced alongside lessons learned and promising practice.

2. Aims and methods

Evaluating Multiply: UKSPF Place evaluation

2.1. Multiply in England has been evaluated by the Department for Education; in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, Multiply has been evaluated by MCHLG within the place-level element of the UKSPF evaluation.

2.2. The place-based case study element of UKSPF evaluation focuses on up to 34 lead LAs with the aim of building a detailed understanding of how UKSPF has worked in different places. As part of this work, research teams for Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland have explored a common set of process evaluation questions (see Table 1) to understand how Multiply has been implemented in the case-study areas outside of England: South West Wales, South East Wales, North Wales, Mid Wales, Northern Ireland (economic inactivity projects), Glasgow, Edinburgh, Highlands and North Ayrshire. This has utilised qualitative methods only, through interviews with Multiply leads in LAs and some local delivery partners.

Table 1: Multiply Process Evaluation in Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland: Example research questions

• How were the spending decisions made?
• Which specific cohorts did you choose to target?
• Which specific barriers have you faced in delivering Multiply interventions, and how have you responded to them?
• What level of confidence would you have in delivering numeracy support again?

Deep dive research in Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland

2.3. To complement the place-based Multiply process evaluation work, a series of deep dives have been conducted to explore the delivery processes and identify the lessons around innovative and promising practice, as well as the challenges faced by specific place-based Multiply programmes in Scotland Wales Northern Ireland. The deep dives have been conducted in Falkirk (Scotland), Wrexham (Wales) and Department for the Economy interventions in Northern Ireland. The Department for Education are conducting a full evaluation of the processes and impact of Multiply across England.

Wrexham – Deep dive research focus and methodology

2.4. Research on the Wrexham Multiply programme has already been conducted by Wavehill, covering a period from July 2024 to December 2025^{[footnote 3]}. This focussed on understanding how Multiply (alongside other UKSPF funded projects) delivered against the overall programme objectives, whether the funding was delivered in the most effective way and sets out useful lessons for future funding programmes. Findings from this research should be read alongside the previous report by Wavehill.

2.5. For this research project 9 qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 interviewees. No interviewees, except two project leads in Wrexham council, had been interviewed as part of the Wavehill research, to avoid duplication and build on the local evidence base.

2.6. These interviews further addressed the process of developing and delivering Multiply in Wrexham (with a greater focus on how the council built internal partnerships to deliver this), the experience of specific organisations in delivering interventions and investigated the outputs, outcomes and impacts of the programme (including additional/unexpected outcomes). Interviewees also provided information about the cohorts targeted by Multiply and future developments in relation to adult skills. Table 2 sets out specific research questions which framed the research.

Table 2 - Multiply Process Evaluation: Wrexham research questions

1. How has Multiply been designed and delivered?
    a. How was additional funding accessed and used?
    b. What have been the successes and challenges?
2. Have Multiply interventions produced the intended results? If so for whom, to what extent and in what circumstances?
    a. Which groups of beneficiaries were reached? Were any missed?
3. Have there been any additional outcomes achieved during delivery of Multiply?
4. What is the legacy of Multiply for Wrexham in terms of delivering similar interventions in the future?

3. Summary findings from Welsh place-level evaluations

Funding context

3.1. Wales was allocated a total of £101 million Multiply funding^{[footnote 4]} and each lead LA developed their own programme of Multiply projects (alongside a small number of pan-regional projects). As part of the place-level UKSPF evaluation, local research teams explored the implementation of Multiply in North Wales, Mid Wales, South East Wales and South West Wales.

3.2. Table 3 details the Multiply allocations for the lead LA included in UKSPF place based evaluations along with Wrexham. The allocation per head of population aged 19 and over was £40.29. Compared to the allocation per head for Scotland (£8.28) this indicates there was a very high level of funding available for Wales through this allocation method.

Table 3: Multiply allocations per head of population

Lead Local Authority	Multiply Allocation*	Multiply allocation per head of population** aged 19+
Wales	£101,054,634	£40.29
North Wales	£21,838,629	£39.61
Mid Wales	£7,322,930	£43.00
South East Wales	£48,100,003	£39.27
South West Wales	£23,793,072	£42.38
Wrexham	£3,917,353	£36.68

* Full Multiply Allocations by lead LA UKSPF allocations (2022-2025)
** Population data for Wales 2023 Estimates of the population for England and Wales - Office for National Statistics

3.3. Key messages from the place-level research on Multiply across Wales are presented here.

Design

There was a significant amount of funding available for Wales which put pressure on teams to develop and implement projects quickly. Limited groundwork and precedent for delivering these types of numeracy interventions increased the pressures on capacity, skills and time.

In Mid Wales, a relatively large number of projects were commissioned which created competition between providers and, in addition, engagement with beneficiaries was made challenging due to the large number of projects being delivered across the area. This was reflected in other areas of Wales.

Delivery

A range of delivery approaches were used including:

• using the community sector as a mechanism to channel funding locally
• delivering through the UKSPF People Skills fund where this aligned with Multiply
• outsourcing Multiply allocations to larger local providers
• delivering in-house
• delivering externally through single-provider models or multi-providers, including FE colleges, private sector organisations, and voluntary groups

Use of the community sector as a delivery agent varied: in Mid Wales this approach did not attract high demand, while in North Wales, the Key Fund approach made Multiply more accessible and effective to smaller organisations and demonstrated how a flexible and creative approach to the types of projects delivered by Multiply helped to improve uptake.

Successes

The inclusion of “hard-to-reach” target groups not currently engaging with other skills provision was seen as a success across all regions. This included people in prison, social housing tenants, people with additional needs, people with disabilities, and mental health conditions, parents, those wishing to improve their confidence in the workplace, homeless people, and younger people - whose participation was enhanced by social media outreach and additional youth worker recruitment.

Community based methods were seen to be more effective than rigid, qualification-based models.

The skill of delivery staff to tailor approaches to the needs of particular cohorts and in developing activities that were creative and engaging was also seen as a positive in delivering Multiply.

Challenges

The key challenge was delivering the totality of Multiply funding. The formula used for Multiply in Wales resulted in a high level of funding that outstripped demand for numeracy-focussed projects. This created an inability to attract the level of interest and number of applications to assign full Multiply allocations in a large number of places. To attempt to mitigate this, much direct engagement was needed with individual providers to support delivery, thus limiting local teams’ capacity for other work. For Wrexham, the Key Fund approach seems to have mitigated some of this risk, enabling them to access further funding – this will be explored in section 4.

Low demand for numeracy initiatives was found across Wales due to: a misalignment of the Multiply programme with the identified needs of the area, the lack of sufficient training providers/tutors across the country and provision of existing initiatives already in place, including the Welsh Government’s Wales Essential Skills Toolkit (WEST) programme aimed at increasing numeracy and digital literacy for those aged 16 and over.

A further practical challenge included delivering across a large rural region. One area indicated there was a need to deliver a greater number of sessions to smaller groups, which required more resource than initially anticipated.

It was difficult to recruit suitably qualified staff - made more challenging by the short-term contracts on offer. The short timescales for delivery were also highlighted as a barrier to both engaging with target beneficiaries and also having the time to progress through to higher levels of qualification.

The focus on achieving Level 2 equivalent qualifications was seen to be difficult by one region. Though Multiply achieved a range of other outcomes, the programme did not often deliver against its intended purpose of delivering a Level 2 standard qualification.

4. Context: Late-stage programme design in Wrexham

4.1. Wrexham County Borough Council (WCBC) received £2.3m in Multiply funding (later raised to £2.43m using underspend) and invested this in 28 projects. Grants were administered through a two-stage process (an expression of interest, followed by invitation to a full application) and advertised through an open call. An initial webinar was used to gather potential applicants together to inform them of the process and establish relationships. Interviewees reported this helped encourage a wide range of applications from different organisations – aligning with the aims of WCBC to attract a variety of types of projects.

4.2. Locally, the Multiply Key Fund created a lower funding envelope (£10,000 to £200,000) for applicants to access compared to the initial £250,000 limit for the North Wales region. This was seen to increase the number of bids substantially, but also likely supported greater spend, delivery and therefore ability to apply for additional funding from regional underspend. More detailed research of the Key Fund design and impact can be found in the Multiply Key Fund Evaluation report by Wavehill (2025, unpublished).

4.3. A short extension to Multiply was agreed in late 2024, moving the final delivery date to from December 2024 to March 2025. There were proposals to release additional money to Wrexham in October 2024, though final agreement was delayed until December 2024. This was finalised after MHCLG confirmed money could not be redistributed to People & Skills projects.

4.4. Given the fund was due to end in March 2025^{[footnote 4]}, Wrexham faced a challenge in determining how to spend the additional money in the remaining three months. Local delivery leads reported using the relationships built through the initial Multiply programme to understand capacity of partners to deliver additional outputs and outcomes in Wrexham. Close relationships and project management allowed WCBC to undertake a rapid application of interest process with existing providers and those delivering other UKSPF projects.

4.5. An additional £213,527 was accessed and spent from the North Wales regional underspend on Multiply, a decision supported by representatives from other counties in the region. Ultimately, there was a mix of extended and additional projects funded, making use of the additional delivery time to March 2025. 6 projects were extended, with 2 new Multiply projects being undertaken^{[footnote 5]}. One council staff member highlighted the use of this time to:

…make sure that we finished off everything that we planned to rather than rushing it… more about sort of quality than quantity, you know, just making sure it’s still worthwhile and [achieving] what we’d set out to achieve.

 WCBC interview

4.6. The additional money also helped to exceed the original output and outcome targets set, as described in section 5.

5. Wrexham deep dive: Findings

Design

5.1. Within the council, a multi-disciplinary team was set up to combine experience of delivery across education and business. This was seen to prevent siloed working and eliminate elements of competition. Leads from these departments met regularly during the design phase to assess key funds applications and to set up the fund. Creativity was encouraged, including an attitude of “thinking outside the box”. This was reported to have worked well, enabling different Multiply projects with businesses, schools and education partners to be delivered which may not have otherwise.

5.2. The Multiply funding model was reported to have been more flexible than other adult community learning funding. Multiply was not funded per head and thus provided additional financial resources (for example, venue hire) to support delivery and “start-up” of projects, which would have required additional council funding if delivered through the Adult Community Learning Grant.

5.3. Delivery partners interviewed for this report identified a number of factors related to their success in designing effective projects:

• using experience of delivering community learning projects and youth services
• using learning from delivering adult learning to change project focus and target family learning “using children to engage adults” where they have previously struggled to engage adults alone
• prior experience understanding how to engage parents (including what types of courses or events may be most popular)
• being embedded in communities, enabling delivery partners to hear directly from beneficiaries
• a strong local business community in Wrexham, which has engaged in wider UKSPF projects
• good connections with local schools to help design content and timing of courses/events delivered on site

Advertising and engaging

5.4. The initial webinar held attracted many new prospective delivery partners as well as people and organisations known to the council. Extensive advertising and marketing activity followed to access participants, including social media, workshops, newsletters, flyers, word of mouth (through community engagement) and engagement with school and business channels of communication. Special attention was given to attract those who are “harder to reach” to ensure access was easier for people with fears of engaging with further learning, especially around maths:

.. you can just quite subtly pick up a leaflet… it’s a good way to sort of advertise what we were doing in a very subtle way that parents could access or adults who were attending

 Delivery partner interview

5.5. Businesses were reported as easy to engage, partly due to undertaking UKSPF interventions for the council, though it was also felt there is a strong business community in Wrexham:

I think one of the one of the really one of the strengths of Wrexham is we have really good networks in terms of local businesses and in terms of the colleges and the universities and our schools and the third sector. So, it was quite easy to infiltrate and promote [Multiply]

 WCBC interview

5.7. However, for some of the course-based learning activities, getting people to sign up and attend proved more challenging.

Projects funded

5.8. There were a wide range of types of projects that WCBC aimed to, and were able to, fund through Multiply. These took place in a variety of community and formal settings, adapted to fit the needs of attendees (see section 5.23 to 5.26) for further discussion):

• budgeting & benefit application support
• training for domiciliary care services
• training for businesses – finance, marketing and presentation skills
• maths upskilling for HGV and forklift truck drivers
• family learning in schools
• maths upskilling related to carbon reduction in businesses
• blacksmithing
• cooking on a budget
• gardening
• cooking classes for older and bereaved men
• family learning through bushcraft
• photography
• Wales Counts – life sciences and maths events

Delivery of Multiply in Wrexham

5.8. Following set up, the key fund administration, monitoring and claims were managed by a separate regeneration team at WCBC. This was reported to have put some strain on the key funds team, who were also managing other non-Multiply projects. This was reported to be perceived as resulting in less close monitoring processes. When the original WCBC team took on management of Multiply again in October 2024, there was the risk of underspend across the fund. The team conducted closer management and quality assurance, speaking with each project to assess this risk and supporting mitigation work.

5.9. Several interviewees referenced a “private sector” mindset embedded in the team, resulting from several employees’ experience of careers beyond the public sector, particularly in commercial practice. One WCBC council interviewee described needing to market and “sell” Multiply through a “sales pitch” to local delivery partners to ensure rapid engagement and delivery in a short time frame. This experience was reported to help “think outside the box” to drive delivery, and complemented the passion, commitment and strong ambition for achievement present in the WCBC team more widely. Strong relationships with finance, legal and digital colleagues across WCBC were also reported as being key to delivering to short timescales. A committed and cooperative leadership team at the council helped support and steer the team’s delivery of Multiply.

5.10. Delivery largely built on existing experience and knowledge of partners in Wrexham. This helped deliver to short timescales as organisations were known entities and could be relied upon to deliver; schools in particular were approached where an existing link was present. Using existing relationships was reported to encourage better attendance at courses and events, particularly where delivery partners were already known to and embedded in local communities.

5.11. Continuous communication throughout delivery, but especially during the final few months to March 2025, helped create supportive relationships that enabled delivery of outcomes.

5.12. One council interviewee also reflected that during the process, delivery partners collaborated to achieve outcomes; there was less “fighting for beneficiaries” and it was reported that some collaborations may continue into future partnerships when applying for funding.

Successes

5.13. Interviewees from delivery organisations reported a positive and supportive working relationship with the WCBC team. There was an acknowledgment of the level of pressure WCBC were under to support a large number of projects; despite this the team was reported as being friendly, helpful and responsive to issues. Delivery partners felt able to raise issues and that they would be heard and supported to work through them.

5.14. Whilst the Multiply guidance did not allow for funding to be moved onto projects delivered under other UKSPF investment priorities, there was greater flexibility within the Multiply programme itself. The variety and scope of what could be delivered and how was reported as a positive aspect of the programme, especially being able to adapt to changes and experiences during delivery to best respond to local demand.

5.15. The flexibility of Multiply allowed for projects to be delivered in creative ways that would best engage and support different cohorts. This was contrasted to the Welsh Government’s Adult Community Learning programme which focuses on accredited outcomes and doesn’t allow for more intensive, targeted support with maths. The flexibility inherent in Multiply provided resources to engage people more sceptical of attending – confidence could be built one-to-one with potential attendees before the course/event, to improve the likelihood of people stepping through the door or attending all sessions.

5.16. The design of different projects changed through delivery; learning about what worked or didn’t was built into future sessions. For example, one training course for people in employment was adapted to be delivered as two full day sessions rather than four half day so attendees would be less disrupted at work and more likely to attend all sessions.

5.17. This flexibility also allowed maths to be “hidden” within programmes, helping to demystify and contextualise maths in more engaging ways than formal maths courses could. A “broad range” of maths was included in courses to educate about how maths could be useful in real world scenarios.

And it wasn’t simple, it was hard, but it was a really good way of teaching it… you’re learning other skills as well

 WCBC interview

Challenges

5.18. The window for delivery was shortened due to late confirmation of funding, and subsequent council processes needed to assess and quality assure bids. This left around 14 months to deliver, including extension periods, and created pressure to meet targets. When the Multiply extension arrived, this was agreed upon in late December, creating further pressure on delivery organisations to plan new and further project delivery early in the new year at pace. It was also reported that engaging people who were “hard to reach” was harder due to this compressed timeline.

5.19. There was some concern that the short funding window created short term demand in local populations and would lead to disappointment when the funding abruptly ended.

5.20. Working with different delivery partners created unique challenges, such as fitting courses and events into term time and the daily routines of schools and prisons. Within prisons, courses needed to be an hour shorter than the same course delivered externally, due to restrictions of the prison timetable. For schools, there was an acknowledgement that delivery timings will always be at odds with the councils. Whilst flexibility of staff helped during the short delivery phase for Multiply, future projects with schools would benefit from advance notice of funding ahead to enable more effective planning and participation.

5.21. Creation of the Key Fund enabled smaller organisations to deliver in Wrexham; this became a challenge where less experienced volunteers and staff were responsible for dealing with council processes and claims. Further support was needed from the council in these situations, creating more pressure on the central WCBC team.

5.22. One reported challenge around family learning was the lack of continuity in the families that attended. There was no guarantee of seeing the same family each week, which may have been more beneficial for engagement in achieving longer term outcomes. Future projects could consider how to engage families more consistently.

Beneficiaries engaged

5.23. There were a range of beneficiaries of Multiply projects in Wrexham, including:

• young people with emotional school avoidance and their parent/guardians
• young adults and their parents
• people with disabilities and poor mental health
• adults over 50
• migrants and people without English as a first language
• rural and farming communities
• people in prison
• childcare professionals
• small businesses, including entrepreneurs, start-ups and sole traders
• job seekers, referred from DWP
• people working in charities, not-for-profits and social enterprises

5.24. Adults were often engaged through children, who acted as the “hook” to bring adults into projects they may not have attended alone. Combined with a more relaxed and practical way of “doing” maths education, this was reported to make sessions more engaging and helped achieve outcomes, particularly improving confidence with maths. Interviewees reported that this approach of experiencing maths education with children helped to break down stigma attached to maths. Children were also reported to have benefitted from additional maths lessons, although they could not be formally counted in the monitoring data.

I think we always find those hard to reach families difficult to engage with, and I think that’s why we tried to be innovative with, like cooking on a budget, type activities and things like that where the parents were coming in to support the children… even through adult community learning, it’s always hard to reach parents that we find the most difficult to engage with

 WCBC interview

5.25. Interviewees working on business-oriented projects reported that many attendees were people in smaller organisations who may not have been able to access training budgets in their jobs. Multiply courses for those in employment provided external opportunities for learning and development that had good take up from the Wrexham business community.

So [we had] company directors [attend]; that’s interesting because it suggests to me that they want access to skills and training, but they don’t have the budgets or they’re not big enough obviously to have a learning and development department

 Delivery partner interview

5.26. Local DWP partners at the Job Centre referred many people to one Multiply funded course but there were challenges relating to attendance. Interviewees reported participants had limited incentives to attend as they had not paid for the course, but were hesitant to implement disincentives, such as a deposit system, as this may create a financial barrier to attending. The key learning from this project was to implement flexibility and options into the course where possible, to make it easier for people to attend.

Missed beneficiaries

5.27. Concerns were reported by some delivery partners about the way in which eligible beneficiaries in Wrexham were defined. WCBC required eligible beneficiaries to have a Wrexham postcode. This excluded those who worked in Wrexham and who contributed to the local economy by working in locally based businesses. Some interviewees reported this limiting who they could offer training and courses to, including across the variety of organisations based in the local business park. One council interviewee also highlighted applications were entered for Wrexham Multiply funding from organisations located in neighbouring counties, which could not be approved due to geographic eligibility rules.

5.28. The difficulty of this eligibility decision was acknowledged by WCBC and was attributed to their decision to deliver in Wrexham, for local residents. It was reported there was no clear Government guidance to follow and so a local decision had to be made. Policymakers developing future government guidance on adult education programmes should consider how to provide clearer eligibility guidance to reduce differing local interpretations or enable greater regional collaboration on projects.

5.29. Several interviewees reported delivering to Multiply activities to beneficiaries who did not meet the geographic eligibility criteria regardless. Pilot sessions were delivered to a mix of eligible and non-eligible beneficiaries in order to “bulk out” the numbers – non-attendance at more formal courses such as these required delivery partners to oversubscribe sessions to maximise delivery.

Outcomes, lessons and legacy

5.30. Interviewees reported that the Wrexham Multiply programme had overall produced the intended outputs and outcomes. Table 4 sets out the final outputs achieved during the programme. Only one target^{[footnote 6]} output was not met (number of people referred from partners onto upskill courses) whilst all others exceeded targets by at least 25%. However, it is not clear if the number of people participating in Multiply funded courses are all unique learners, due to a variety of courses and events locally which did not collect identifying information. Table 5 presents the final outcomes data, indicating that both targets related to participation in, and achievement of, maths qualifications were met and exceeded by over 10%.

Table 4: Wrexham Multiply outputs

Output	Target	Actual	Percentage Actual
Number of adult numeracy courses run in a local area through Multiply	42	707	1683%
Number of people participating in Multiply funded courses	4200	5256	125%
Number of people achieving a qualification	420	1478	352%
Number of courses developed in collaboration with employers	10	107	1070%
Number of people referred from partners onto upskill courses	420	222	53%
Number of different cohorts participating in numeracy courses	42	125	298%

Table 5: Wrexham Multiply outcomes

Outcome	Target	Actual	Percentage Actual
Number of adults participating in maths qualifications and courses up to, and including, Level 2 equivalent	4200	4899	117%
Number of adults achieving maths qualifications up to, and including, Level 2 equivalent	420	465	111%

Additional outcomes

5.31. However, interviewees acknowledged there were a wider range of outcomes achieved by beneficiaries than the categories reported on in the formal monitoring.

5.32. On an individual level, interviewees reported that participants in Multiply courses and events became more confident in engaging with maths and in continuing education or accessing further work opportunities. Delivery partners perceived Multiply (and Multiply type projects) as helping people to overcome barriers that keep them at home or out of work, including resistance, or fear, of attending formal education settings.

It can also support soft engagement… a way of getting adults to consider that return to more formal education, whether that’s through some of the adult community learning courses… or whether that’s sort of returning to something that’s provided… by Wrexham University [foundation courses]… it sort of switches people back on again

 Delivery partner interview

5.33. Family learning activities were reported to have helped support the relationship between adults and children during delivery, providing wider wellbeing impacts than solely numeracy education.

5.34. There were also anecdotal reports of those leaving prison after attending Multiply courses attributing the programme to helping them on release:

We’ve heard anecdotally that subsequently to the programme, quite a few people have managed to go into work having been released from prison and have mentioned, you know, that they’ve been on the course and that it helped them get an interview. So that’s really, really positive.

 Delivery partner interview

5.35. For businesses, interviewees reported new relationships being established between companies or small business, leading to enhanced collaboration and sharing best practice. Relationships were aided by the presence of a business lead in WCBC and an “excited” local business community who were “easy” to engage with. One interviewee reported that Multiply helped sole traders combat the isolation of working independently by helping to build new social connections with other businesses, as well as develop skills they would otherwise not have the budget to fund. Interviewees expected future tangible impacts on wellbeing and the local economy, kickstarted by Multiply, but requiring ongoing support to facilitate this.

5.36. Two interviewed delivery organisations also reported plans to use training materials and structures established during Multiply for future business development and staff training. This will be explored further in the next section on legacy of Multiply.

5.37. Finally, there was the perception that some employed beneficiaries may use Multiply funded support to take further steps towards other qualifications. One example given was playgroup staff using newly achieved maths qualifications to undertake childcare qualifications, though this wouldn’t be apparent in current programme timelines.

Lessons learnt

5.38. Many interviewees reported positive experiences and lessons from designing and delivering Multiply projects, including building strong partnerships, but wished for a longer time frame in which to deliver.

5.39. Having the right tools and resources to deliver effectively and give confidence to people engaging with maths education was reported as an important lesson. The flexibility of the funding was perceived as enabling WCBC to fill a gap which more formal further education courses could not – doing the engagement work needed to break down barriers to engagement.

5.40. Multiply enabled businesses to consider how their offer could be adapted for future participants, including when courses are delivered (e.g. more night courses) and to better understand local education and soft skill needs which could be supported with future programmes.

5.41. One interviewee at WCBC reported future programme design could focus more on fewer projects but greater quantity of outcomes. Monitoring and quality assurance of delivery could then be increased more easily, to ensure better quality of delivery. The “pop-up” nature of the funding required rapid quality assurance mechanisms to be set up, and there was a concern that undertaking new projects with delivery partners WCBC did not have a relationship with were riskier.

5.42. Much additional work was reported to have taken place in order to spend the funding in the time available. Administering smaller levels of funding to a larger number of delivery partners both helped and hindered this process, and the commitment of the team, as well as their “sales pitch” engagement with local delivery partners was seen to have been a positive.

I think the most important lessons were positive ones… if you get the right people in the right places, then you can deliver and you can put together an exciting programme…

I knew it was going to be a hard sell…so we did it as more of a like a sales pitch you would normally do if you’re in private industry rather than in local government… we spent a lot of time putting together the presentation to make sure that that message got out to the right people as well

 WCBC interviewee

5.43. Experience delivering through Multiply helped delivery partners understand how best to engage schools in future programmes. In particular, engaging in advance of new terms to fit into long-term school schedules and create strong partnerships, adapting provisions to fit school days and understanding specific schools’ populations and needs.

Legacy of Multiply

Project continuation

5.44. There were several reports of community-based activities funded under Multiply being continued beyond the funding timeline (with small adaptations). Projects such as Men in Sheds, school-based numeracy sessions and social shopping trips for older people benefitted from Multiply “start-up” grant funding alongside the partnership building and engagement Multiply enabled with new parts of the community.

5.45. Business delivery partners reported plans to use new or expanded training packages and resources to deliver commercial training to a wider cohort in the Wrexham area. As with community projects, businesses have been supported by “start-up” type funding to improve their reach (and reputation) in Wrexham through Multiply.

As a business, it’s been great for us… this really for us is a stepping stone to be able to [as a business have] a commercial offering of skills, you know to businesses going forwards” …So the [local] economy will still benefit from us being given this funding to upscale people, but also develop our own offering as a business

 Delivery partner interview

Relationship building

5.46. Strong relationships have been built with the Community Council through delivery of Multiply. The Community Council are reported to now be close partner with some departments in WCBC and can continue to help make links with the wider community in Wrexham on future projects. One organisation aimed to build on Multiply funded projects and move towards creating a local community hub:

The vision is that we set up almost like its own village… that the community are using after school, holidays, weekends and there’s projects that help it become self-sustainable where we have got a bit of a social enterprise within it [where] the kids are making things

 Delivery partner interview

5.47. Internally, WCBC is looking to build on the recognised skill gaps highlighted by Multiply and use other sources of government funding to meet those needs. Specifically mentioned was Investment Zones funding being proposed to support future skills related to advanced manufacturing. Confidence building and steps towards further work and training were reported to be the foundations Multiply enabled for this future work.

6. Conclusions

6.1. This deep dive has identified several factors that have contributed to the success of programme design, delivery and the achievement of outcomes in Wrexham. The findings are summarised below.

Conclusions: design of Multiply

6.2. Effective Multiply design in Wrexham was underpinned by several key factors.

• Flexible funding parameters helped provide additionality to projects which could not be solely funded by other sources which had more rigid conditions (e.g. Adult Community Learning funding).
• The multi-disciplinary team set up within the council to break down siloed working, combined with a creative and “outside the box” mindset, helped to provide openness to a range of business, education and community-based projects.
• Varying forms of engagement (a webinar, leafletting, social media) were used to attract people to courses. This allowed for more subtle ways to engage “hard-to-reach” groups than direct advertising, which was reported to risk “singling out” and therefore putting out adults traditionally less able or willing to engage in further learning.

Conclusions: delivery of Multiply

6.3. Effective delivery of the Multiply programme in Wrexham involved:

• Strong leadership from WCBC, allowing projects to deliver effectively and beyond the original scope of the programme. Delivery was supported by an engaged business and education sector in Wrexham.
• Continuous and open communication between WCBC and delivery partners, helping to create supportive relationships.
• Existing partnerships which were key to delivering in short timescales, though this didn’t prevent organisations new to working with WCBC succeeding there was perceived to be more risk working with unfamiliar partners. Several organisations working with schools reported delivering though existing relationships, as they did not have the time to engage new schools.
• Adapting the design of different projects through delivery; learning about what worked or didn’t was built into future sessions.

Conclusions: intended and unintended outcomes  

6.4. The Multiply programme in Wrexham achieved (and exceeded) formal and additional outcomes during delivery.

• Overall, the Wrexham Multiply programme was successful in achieving and outperforming all but one output and outcome metric. Almost twenty times the planned number of courses were run locally, attracting over 1000 more people to courses and events.
• 107 courses were developed with employers, suggesting good collaboration with businesses, and 465 adults achieved maths qualifications up to and including Level 2 equivalent, 111% of the target figure.
• Multiply projects had good take up across a broad range of beneficiaries, including family learning, delivery to prisoners and businesses across Wrexham.
• Some beneficiaries were not included or counted in delivery due to the requirement to have a Wrexham postcode leading to some frustrations by delivery partners in provision of services.
• Additional outcomes (not recorded in the MHCLG monitoring data collection) were reported including building the confidence of adults to reengage with education and learning and supporting adults and children through family learning to improve the wider family relationship.

Conclusions: legacy of Multiply  

• Local partnerships were supported by Multiply, including strengthening and offering new partnerships between WCBC and local delivery organisations, as well as between delivery partners, perceived to help future collaboration when running courses or events.
• Multiply provided informal “start-up” funding to enable business and community partners to expand or continue delivering upskilling sessions beyond the programme.

---

1. Please contact sharedprosperityfund@wrexham.gov.uk for access to this report. ↩

2. However, UKSPF could not be used where there was a statutory duty to undertake the activity, or if the activity was fully funded by other sources. ↩

3. Wavehill - Social & Economic Research Throughout The UK – please contact sharedprosperityfund@wrexham.gov.uk for access to this report. ↩

4. Delivery was later extended to June 2025 to provide additional time to complete projects. ↩ ↩²

5. These new Multiply projects were delivered by organisations already delivering UKSPF projects. ↩

6. Targets were set by WCBC at the start of the programme, based on local experience and expectations about what could be achieved with the time and resources available. ↩