Moderators and Presenters Mr. Otto LAU

1. The 2nd Progress Update and Consultation Sessionfor NGO IFSC Unit Staff on the Implementation of IFSCs(3:15 p.m. – 5:15 p.m, 6 January 2005) Moderators and Presenters Mr. Otto LAU Chairperson, Specialized Committee on Family and Community Service Mr. KOWK Wai-keung Member, Specialized Committee on Family and Community Service Mr. Jackey Lo Chief Officer, Service Development (Family and Community)

2. Concerns RaisedIn the 1st Progress Update and Consultation Session for NGO IFSC Unit Staffon the Implementation of IFSCs (29 July 2004) Service Transformation Strategies: Pilot IFSC: Test Run Mode (Assumed) Experiences did not cover major issues and situations by Actual IFSCs Actual Implementation of IFSCs: Contingency Mode Many Implementation Issues to be Identified and solutions to work out Both management and frontlines have great adaptation, stress and need to communicate for solutions.

3. Practicability of transition of family services in 12 monthsFSA, service models, work transferals and referrals,service interfacing issues. Staff pooling, staff training, offices, renovations, facilities,operating issues, increased expenses, ….. etc. Mandate of and fundamental differences of NGO and SWD IFSCs Effective channels and platform for clarifications and discussion of IFSC Issues (Among SWD HQs, DSWOs, the Council & NGOs) Many new types of work which NGOs had little previous experience, nor sufficient anticipation to tackle before transforming into actual IFSCs Priorities of RSWs towards these urgent but may not be important requests had not been worked out ?

4. The feasibility of using the resources of 12 NGO IFSC RSWsto operate 15 opening sessions per week Unclear about realistic and official interpretation of the requirement of “Full Service Coverage” (服務包底) by IFSCs Not yet worked out a reasonable and achievable common FSA for NGO IFSCs.

5. PROGRESS UPDATE Service Transformation Strategies: In reality, the re-engineering process has started in high speed, IFSC full implementation in 4 phases. (June 2004; October 2004; January 2005; March 2005). NGOs can reform the process through : Discussion in central platform collectively Discussion with DSWOs at district level individually The Council’s Role To collect, consolidate and facilitate the sharing of information and views among NGOs, To support NGOs to discuss with DSWOs and in the Task Group on IFSCs issues, based on informed sector-wise picture.

6. Central discussion platform established: The Task Group on the Implementation of IFSCs formed in May 2004. Meeting Participants Representatives from FCWB & 13 ADSWO (Family), All the nine NGOs operating IFSCs, Two NGOs operating the Integrated Service Centres The HKCSS Interested individual IFSC frontlines staff (Starting: Nov., 2004) 6 meetings were held (between 28.5.2004 –26.11.2004, Confirmed notes of these meetings were uploaded to SWD Homepage

7. Common IFSC FSA is finalized in principle. Setting up of IFSCs by DSWO districts, has been following the schedule of 4 phases. The pooling of resources are differential in progress. Offices with right sizes and facilities are still to be located and renovated. Training offered for IFSC RSWs are numerous IFSC service models are still to be consolidated. There are still many rooms for improvement and much more time is required to complete the transformation. Practicability of Transformation 12 Months

8. Mandate of and fundamental differences of NGO and SWD IFSCs The philosophy, mission and values of all IFSCs operated by SWD and NGOs should be the same and have no fundamental differences While the scope of service, in principle, should be more or less the same. In operation, however, there are variations in case nature, focus, and specializations due to differences in district needs and the obligation of SWD IFSCs to handle statutory cases and other cases more suitably to be handled by SWD.

9. New types of work request to NGO IFSCs Arise frominterfacing with and partnerships with government departments, other social welfare programmes, professionals, schools, community organizations including district councils, residents’ organizations, religious groups, etc., That make mutual referrals for services and assistance. These referrals, if made properly and timely, provide “entry point” for social workers to help individuals / families in crisis, and echo the spirit of early identification.

10. New types of work request to NGO IFSCs If the cases are eventually screened not to be in need of social work intervention, they should not be taken up by IFSCs. Should NGO IFSCs have doubts about: the appropriateness of referrals/requests being made to them, they can make use of the existing mechanism to seek clarification from the respective DSWO Or if necessary, to put up the issue for deliberation in the Task Group as appropriate.

11. Using 12 RSWs to operate 15 opening Sessions If an IFSC is to operate for 15 opening sessions, flexible deployment or additional of resources is required. Flexibility in resource management to tackle district needs is important. Stationing in an IFSC is only one of the means to serve clients. • At the SWD Task Group • The requirement for an IFSC to open for at least 15 sessions has been removed from the common IFSC FSA. • The no. of minimum opening sessions is to be reviewed before end of March 2005.

12. Realistic and official interpretation of the requirement of “comprehensive service coverage” (服務包底) by IFSCs Each IFSC will serve a well-defined geographical boundary, which should be agreed by all IFSCs in the district. Overlapping of resources can be avoided by having a clear demarcation of service boundary, which also facilitates IFSCs to plan / develop services which are geared towards meeting the needs of individuals / families in a specific locality. The population to be served by each IFSC is within the range of 100,000 to 150,000. As a matter of principle, the respective IFSC should provide services to clients who are in need of IFSC services and whose place of residence is falling within their operational area.

13. Realistic and official interpretation of the requirement of “comprehensive service coverage” (服務包底) by IFSCs IFSCs may not have the full responsibility to work with all the families with needs in their defined service boundaries, but they will always have the responsibility to work with other services in the community to ensure that the needs of the families are being attended to.

14. Common FSA of IFSC A common FSA for an IFSC with 12 RSWs has been agreed The agreed levels for all output standards were subject to: the number of RSWs of each IFSC, and calculated on a pro-rata basis. To ensure that the district needs were being met, the agreed levels would be set on centre basis. Flexibility is introduced by the proposed “two-way” conversion i.e. upward adjustment in the agreed levels for Output Standards 3, 5 and 7 by 20% if the actual output of Output Standard 1 only reached 90% of the agreed level is considered acceptable, on condition that no case in need of IFSC counselling / casework service would be turned away;

15. Tasks Completed by the Task Group Development of Operational Guidelines The following guidelines have been deliberated and agreed: Guidelines on Interim Arrangements regarding Division of Work and Case Transfer Arising from Formation of IFSCs  Guidelines on Interim Arrangements on the Division of Work between IFSCs and FCPSUs Guidelines on Division of Work Between Medical Social Services Units of SWD and FSCs / IFSCs  Guidelines on Division of Work between Integrated Services Teams for Street Sleepers and FSCs / IFSCs Arrangements for Cold Spells

16. Tasks Completed by the Task Group The following concrete measures for strengthening interfacing with other services have been deliberated :  Development of the standardized referral forms for single parent cases between social security field units and NGO FSCs / IFSCs Provision of clinical psychological service for cases of NGO IFSCs and psychological debriefing in response to major critical incidents Development of standardized forms to facilitate IFSCs to handle cases relating to housing issues Referral mechanism of single parents for support service under Ending Exclusion Project  Collaboration with medical social workers regarding the issue of medical waivers, case checking / sharing, provision of emergency psychiatric outreaching, etc.

17. Round Table and Open Discussion Anything you want to clarify ? Do you have any concern to raise ?

18. Thank You !!!