Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 06-05-1995 - X-A 1/ ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. X-,4 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: June 5, 1995 SUBJECT: Youth & Family Services Coordination Function -------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT:Manager PUBLIC HEARING: YES: NO:X --------------------------------------------------------------- ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Green Bananas Project: Manager's Office - ext. 2300 Interim Report TELEPHONE NUMBER - Hillsborough - 732-8181 Chapel Hill - 968-4501 Mebane - 227-2031 Durham - 688-7331 ----------------------------------------------------------------- PURPOSE: To receive an update on the plan of action for improving collaboration in the human service delivery system. BACKGROUND: At the November 15, 1994 meeting, the Board approved the recommendations toward the enhancement of the human services delivery system. These recommendations included hiring an intern to research the feasibility of developing an automated Information & Referral System and contracting with the UNC School of Social Work Foundation to provide consultation services for the Youth and Family Services Coordination Function. At the May 16, 1995 the Board received a report from Loretta Harper, the Management Intern, regarding the establishment of an automated Information & Referral System. Dr. Philip Cooke, from the UNC School of Social Work, will present an interim report tonight on the "Green Bananas" Project. The contract for this project provided for selected School faculty and staff to engage key family and children services stakeholders of Orange County in a process of consensus-building and decision-making concerning an appropriate community-empowered definition of, structure for, and agreed-upon protocol for collaboration. RECOMMENDATION(S) : The Manager recommends that the Board receive the report as information. top2 Green Bananas Project Interim Report June 1995 An Orange County Government_, Public-Private Partnership, UNC School of Social Work Collaborative Prepared by: Philip Cooke, DSW and Sara Wilbur, MSW COL 0 3 Executive Summary PROJECT GREEN BANANAS (PROJECT) is one of three FY 1994-95 Orange County supported initiatives (along with the Automated Information and Referral System and the Youth Forum) to enhance collaboration among human service resources. The PROJECT is a "Community Building Collaborative" between County Government, the Public Private Partnership, and the UNC School of Social Work (see Attachment A). Working as a team with the County Manager's Office, the Project has engaged a wide representation of the County in exploring how human service organizations, programs, and professionals are working together - and possibly could work together - to serve the community. To accomplish this end, the PROJECT has also attempted to work with and through existing structures and practices. One obvious success of the PROJECT has been the engagement of key stakeholders in a community dialog of "collaboration" as a desired behavior. Another success has been an understanding of the community's strong capacity for working together, and an increased understanding of what currently "works" for Orange County. A desired outcome of the PROJECT is to find acceptable ways of using resources more effectively and efficiently. This PROJECT, along with others, should help develop a "community readiness" for the many changes that are expected to impact human services in the near future. The following Interim Report is a summary of activities toward achieving the three PROJECT goals. 1. Community Definition of Collaboration Many human service funding sources are requiring agencies and programs to give evidence of their unique and non - duplicative role in contributing to a "Community Outcome". This evidence is generally measured by assessing the kind and quantity of collaborative activity of a given agency or program. An examination of . 1 4 activity which are considered collaboration. Hence, the need for a Community Definition which can be used by all players. One major activity of the PROJECT therefore has been to establish a Working Definition of Collaboration. This effort has been through the Orange County Human Services Coordinating Council (HSCC). Fifty-seven (57) agencies were surveyed. Survey response information is currently being analyzed and a Definition will be prepared for adoption by HSCC in June/July 1995. Preliminary findings suggest that many types of collaborative relationships are currently in place among human service professionals and program personnel at the line staff level. These collaborative activities are taking place more at the information sharing and rp ogtani levels than at the administrative level. This is an important finding since most community perceptions of collaborative or noncollaborative organizational activities are made at the administrative (Board Member/Director) level. Often the community is unaware of collaborative activities at the line staff level (see Attachment B). 2. Identifying Describing and Highlighting Successful Collaborative Structures As a product of research on examples of collaboration in Orange County and elsewhere, the following communication tools have been developed and are currently being shared with the human service and business sectors. 1. Presentation (in overhead format) describing examples of current successful collaborative work among both public and private agencies. 2. Information packet describing practices of collaboration to be used as a resource for local collaborative efforts. 3. Exploring Opportunities and Mechanisms for Enhancing Collaboration A re-occurring theme (since 1988) has addressed how to improve coordination among human services. Recommendations by various community task forces have 2 5 included different ways the community may enhance collaborative service systems. One solution advocated by some groups has been the creation of personnel positions as "Collaborators or Coordinators". Another suggested solution has been the integration of certain functions performed by all agencies and programs (i.e.: needs assessments) into one or two lead agencies or coalition of agencies. A third suggestion has been the re- charging of existing Advisory Commissions to play a stronger role in promoting and monitoring joint ventures to achieve measurable outcomes. These suggestions and others are currently being explored and tested with key stakeholders. More formal recommendations will be provided in a final project report. 3 Attachment A 6 PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP YOUTH INITIATIVES 1995 Following the October, 1994 trip to Bloomington, Indiana, The Public Private Partnership of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County has initiated three community-building efforts involving youth and youth-serving resources:Each involves the exploration and demonstration of how different and separate resources in the community can work together to achieve better results for Orange County youth. Each of the initiatives also reflects a partnership among the University, local governments, and local businesses. Project Green Bananas is an Orange County government/UNC-Chapel Hill School Of Social Work opportunity to examine ways in which youth-serving agencies currently are collaborating with each other and ways in which such collaboration may be enhanced. The term "green bananas" was introduced by UNC's Frank Loda during the PPP trip to signify the urgency of the community acting now rather than later in maximizing our resources for successful young adults in Orange County. The Orange County community is blessed with a large variety of youth-serving resources. For many people, however, there is the perception that these resources may be uncoordinated, duplicative, inefficient, and ineffective in producing desired outcomes. Our examination, however, reveals that there is an impressive degree of youth-serving agencies and programs working together and sharing resources to yield very positive results. This project hopes to showcase these successes, in addition to identifying ways to improve collaboration. Project Productivity and Citizenship Enhancement is a private business/public schools/UNC School of Education initiative that focuses on the creation of opportunities for youth to have a successful transition from school to the world of work. The project builds upon the existing efforts of the community's two school systems and the Triangle Workforce Information Group. The goal of this initiative will be to explore ways to enhance the outcomes of the many community programs that are currently involved in youth work apprenticeship, tutoring, and service Ieaming. The nature of work and its participatory requirements are changing dramatically. How a community prepares its youth for participation in its economic life has become a priority for most American communities. This project will develop action planning to address this issue. A third PPP-sponsored initiative will be a Youth Forum to be held in the Fall. This effort is being planned in conjunction with the two high schools in Orange County and other youth related structures. The Forum will provide an opportunity for youth representatives to develop and present their agendas at a "community table". Details of the Forum will be announced during the Summer. Dr. Philip W. Cooke April 5, 1995 . 7 Attachment B organization name Orange County Human Service Coordinating Council Human Service Providers Working Together April 1995 Questionnaire The activities listed below describe some of the ways organizations often collaborate to increase their effectiveness and client responsiveness. Please share how your organization works with others. 1. Check(✓) the activities on the list below that your organization participates in currently. 2. Review your checked activities and star(*) all that your organization finds most valuable. 3. Use blank spaces to note other relevant activities of your organization. Program/Service Delivery: Joint program planning, implementation and/or evaluation(meetings,joint reports etc.) Development of uniform system for paperwork between programs or agencies (common forms) Co-locating services (two or more programs sharing space or field offices) Interagency case management teams or joint intake/assessment decisions Other: Information/Referral: Contributions to community I&R guides and/or needs assessments Participation in community taskforces/committees or boards Referral of potential clients among agencies Other: Administration: Shared staff positions or inter-agency loan of staff Participation in"cooperatives" for certain services (accounting, employee benefit programs) that you could not provide alone Joint funding drives Joint staff development/training Joint grant proposal writing and/or Memorandums of Understanding, Contracts etc. Participate in coalitions to advocate for common goals Other: ************************************************************************** How does your organization define"Collaboration"? Is this definition: _formal(written in organizational documents)Qr_informal(shared verbally) Optional: please share a specific example of collaboration with your organization on back. Please return by*** May 9th *** to: Jan Schopler,(Fax#962-0980)4E UNC School of Social Work 233 E.Franklin St.CB#3550,Chapel Hill,NC 27599-3550 a 8 ESTABLISHING A COMMUNITY ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM FOR HUMAN SERVICES COLLABORATION All communities struggle with issues of human services fragmentation, duplication, gaps, and inefficiency. Ways to coordinate human servi;es has been as a public concern since the origins of formal human services programs. HumAn services sponsors, professionals, and volunteers spend a considerable amount of their time attempting to make services more efficient, effective, and relevant. Although consensus in public policy is rare, there is a widely held view that coordination and collaboration among human service providers are essential to efficient and effective delivery systems. There have been no easy or simple solutions to the issues surrounding agencies and/or programs working together as a "system." In fact, there is considerable evidence-- both from history and research--to suggest that coordination is a "manageable" but not "solvable" condition. Each human service agency and/or program operates from a distinct and separate mandate or special interest, has its own reporting and accountability system, and was generally created at a specific time historically to deal with a specific political and social priority. Most programs have their own eligibility criteria, administrative structure, and criteria for success, To further complicate the issue, public human service programs are administered in bureaucracies such as Health, Social Services, etc. which have their own culture, ideology, professional technology, and political economy. Efforts to "solve" the issues of human services coordination on a permanent basis have largely been unsuccessful. Each era appears to invent new ways to promote coordination. During the early part of this century communities cfeated mechanisms such as "Health and Welfare Councils" or "community registries" to d�il.with service coordination. In the 1970s and early 1980s there was a strong movement to deal with the issue through reorganization States and some counties created umbrella agencies in an effort to realign and integrate service programs and resources. This effort generally resulted in adding an additional level of bureaucracy. Even occasional mandates by parent organizations to coordinate local programs failed to provide the necessary waivers of individual agency requirements for local initiatives to be successful. Along with the single agency strategy came efforts to create common user information systems that could serve all programs. Currently there is considerable experimentation taking place with new "collaboratives"--structures and processes for pooling, sharing, and locating professional resources from different programs or agencies in high-risk neighborhoods, school systems, housing developments, etc. Also renewed emphasis is being given to creating and managing public-private "networks" of service programs and/or agencies. Communities which have experimented with one-stop service centers or single portals of entry models of structuring services are finding that they continue to have problems with coordination.. Although agency and/or program coordination cannot be completely solved short of creating a new political and economic system, the issue can be managed at the community level. In fact each community is confronted with the task of developing its own 9 ` way of managing human services coordination. A first step in developing such a community management and accountability system is to define community expectations. What is coordination? Coordination generally refers to separate actions taken in cooperation with each other. Orange County has had various experiences with two or more human service agencies or programs working together in common action on a specific, time-limited issue or agenda. Coordination can exist at different levels ranging from the simple act of sharing of information to the complex task of joint planning and administration of a program. What is services integration? tion? Services integration generally refers to combining different programs and/or service organizations under one administrative authority and structure. What is collaboration? Collaboration is generally considered the process by which several agencies and/or programs make a formal, sustained effort to accomplish an outcome of some kind. Collaboration is "results-oriented" requiring a commitment to and participation in collective action. In an ideal situation collaboration would suggest ®a structure for planning and acting together. 1B a style of work in which agencies and programs make collective decisions. ®a sense of community in which members see themselves more as complementary and mutually supportive players than as competitors. ®standards for measuring the success of collaboration. ®initiatives for collaboration. °°?t Keys to successful collaboration include: shared vision; process orientation; multiple sector representation; skilled leadership; and community accountability. P. Cooke 4/9/94