Dianne Jackson– Connect Child & Family Services Kerry Thomas – Gateway Family Services

1. The Blue Mountains ConsortiumA case study in organisational capacity building and collaborative practice Dianne Jackson– Connect Child & Family Services Kerry Thomas – Gateway Family Services Tanya James- Blue Mountains City Council

2. Blue Mountains Consortium • Blue Mountains Child and Family Forum • Blue Mountains Family Support Services • Connect Child and Family Services • Gateway Family Services • Gunedoo Child Protection Service • Mountains Outreach Community + • Blue Mountains City Council • Mountains Community Resource Network

3. Factors leading to the development of the Blue Mountains Consortium • Evidence showing that in vulnerable families problems are complex and require “joined up” multi-function services to move forward. • Evidence showing that those most in need of services do not access them. Need to design a service system where all services are potentially the door into all the other services available. “No door is the wrong door” & “soft entry” crucial . • The NSW Department of Community Services tender process for the New Brighter Futures Program requires applicants to demonstrate ability to deliver case management, home visiting, parenting programs and early childhood education. This required a multi-service response.

4. Where we are now…. • Blue Mountains Consortium views itself and operates as a separate entity i.e. separate to the implementation of any particular project • Mission Statement The BMC is a dynamic energetic and philosophically aligned body of independent services working systematically together to build capacity in vulnerable children, families, the community and service systems. BMC leads through an active commitment to collaborative excellence, innovation and best practice.

5. Where we started • Consortium services had a very limited understanding of what each service did or how each contributed to the service system around vulnerable children and families. • A predominantly competitive funding environment encouraged distance and lack of relationship between services. • Dilemma: How do Consoritum members move from thinking about the needs of their individual services to thinking about how to work together to create a strong service system focused on children and families.

6. The Ecological Perspective on Child Protection and Well Being. SOCIETY COMMUNITY FAMILY CHILD

7. Building a Collaboration: Key Turning Points 1. Deep understanding and appreciation of different child, family and community disciplines and service types 2. Agreement on evidence base and practice modality that unite everyone. 3. Collaboration members adopt an ‘organisational’ attitude towards the new collaboration entity

8. Building a Collaboration: Key Turning Points 4. Good will is not sufficient 5. New structures need to be developed and maintained

9. Deep understanding and appreciation of different service types: Blue Mountains Consortium experience • Time • Shared Expertise • Quality relationships.

10. 2. Agreement on evidence base and practice Blue Mountains Consortium: • Early intervention: As early as possible in the (i) life of the child (ii) life of the problem (iii) issue emerging between services.

11. 2. Agreement on evidence base and practice • Child focused and family centred practice. • Strengths based practice • Parallel practice = We aim to increase the quality of relationships between (i) family members (ii) professionals and services working with the family. • Building quality service systems (as well as the quality of our individual services ) delivers better child, family and commuity outcomes.

12. 3. Collaboration members adopt an ‘organisational’ attitude towards the new collaboration entity • Shared vision • Shared values that are walked as well as talked! • Governance structure • Dispute resolution • Referral protocols • Human resource standards • Financial management systems • Administration systems.

13. 4. Good will is not sufficient – Design tools and accountability to make the system work Examples of Blue Mountains Consortium developed forms • Confidentiality form Enables family and service consent to share information about ‘the problem’ • Family contact form: Family strengths and goals are recorded in consultation with family. Form then shared with Consortium staff working with family. • Family reporting form: Enables the family and staff to communicate about (i) actions and progress towards family goals and (ii) family strengths emerging that are making change possible.

14. 5. New structures need to be maintained In order for the new collaborative entity to stay together it requires constant adaption to accommodate changing: • Policy and funding context • Evidence base • Situation internally within each service • Needs and wants of children and families.

15. 5. New structures need to be maintained The Blue Mountains Consortium adapts through: • Ongoing shared training of service staff in the emerging evidence bases and best practice. • Review of systems that bind Consortium services together in order to change what is not working – this keeps staff motivated and engaged. • Explicit discussions about current Consortium structure with a view to future growth.

16. Conversations to begin the collaboration process Read the case study. Have a conversation that establishes: What would your professional discipline do to provide assistance to the case study family? What is one way you and your partner could work together to provide a better outcome for the family? Thinking back on your actual work: Who is one other professional who may be working with a family you are working with? How could a conversation with that professional benefit your family?