District Planning: Issues and Prospects

1. District Planning: Issues and Prospects Joe Leung

2. Changing Needs and Responses • Needs become more complicated, interrelated – demand a more systematic and planned response. • Gradual abandoning the service planning based on population size (FYP) & input control/ not actual needs – standardized and rigid provisions in each district – inadequacy and under-utilization of services. • Centralized planning neglected community involvement. • Rigid program and organizational boundaries – cross sector collaboration difficult. Duplication & gaps.

3. Welfare Planning • Proposed three levels of Welfare planning (strategic, program, business) + district planning (coordination) • Cross sector evidence-based (information and research support) and need-driven planning • Clear service direction (vision guided), objectives, priorities, strategy & outcomes • Effective implementation and monitoring mechanism • Welfare planning (justified needs and performance) is the basis for the allocation of resources. • Government leadership in defining service direction and initiating reforms, with active consultation with the field.

4. SWD and Regionalization • Pre 1978 • DSW- DD – AD (Social Work) – Program Divisions • 1979 • DSW-DD – 4ADs (Development, subvention, social security, operation). Operation – 4 regions/11 Districts (supervise govt. units and coordinate NGOs)

5. 1988 • AD family welfare services (HK, NT, family, elderly, Medical) • AD youth & Rehab. (WK, EK, youth & correction, rehab.) • (Development + operations + region) 1993: • AD family & child welfare (HK, ENT, WNT) • AD Elderly & medical (EK, WK) • AD youth & rehab.

6. 1997 –DD (Welfare services) • AD family & child welfare (NTE) • AD elderly & medical (NTW) • AD Youth & Training (WK) • AD Rehabilitation (HK) • AD Social Security (EK)

7. 2001 • DSW • DD (services) DD (Admin) • ADs • 13 Dos

8. Abolish RO (delayering) and the previous segmented coordination mechanism according to programs (ERO, YO) • Strengthen district responsiveness – need identification, supervise service operation and regional specialized professional teams, outreaching work, planning and coordination team. Engaging district council, departments and community organizations.

9. Main tasks of DO • Planning welfare services on a district basis to meet district needs • Collaborating with district councils, related government departments and district organizations to facilitate the implementation of social welfare policies in the district; • Coordinating with NGOs in the district in respect of delivery of services in meeting the welfare needs of local community; • Establishing a more proactive social outreaching network in the district to help the needy and the disadvantaged; and • Administering and managing centralized operational units. • Needs assessment, joint action with district organizations, coordinate NGOs, targeting at risk groups, and managed SWD services.

10. Service integration • Existing services too fragmented, specialized, with traditional boundaries (barriers) exist between programs, organizations and professions. Duplication and gaps. • Needs cannot be solved by individual program, organization, and profession (no self-sufficiency). • User centered service – services and programs should be built around the multiple needs of users.

11. Joint action and developing partnership so as to reduce traditional boundaries – multi-disciplinary, multi-agency, and multi-programs approach – expanding intervention boundaries (employment, domestic violence and abuses, volunteers) – preventive and educational campaigns. (swapping of services between agencies difficult). • Planning of integrated services – the heart of the district planning – integrated services for the elders, understanding adolescent projects, IFSC, IT for youth. • Coordinating outreaching work targeting vulnerable groups.

12. “There is a need for better coordination between different service providers and greater integration by a single service operator to ensure optimal use of resources and serving clients in a more holistic manner”.

13. Community Building and Planning • Bottom-up initiatives and input (wider community participation essential) – community-based programs. • Untapped resources and joint action (community organizations and departments) - intervention, funding, volunteers, network and relationships. (informal support/ social capital – CIIF). Building community capacity for joint action. • “DSWOs are playing an important role in explaining social welfare policies and proposals to the DCs and the local community, as well as lobbying support for new initiatives and service projects in the district.”

14. Coordination and Partnership • Joint programs, planning. • Pooled budgets – pull resources together to provide an integrated package of care • Shared users, staff/ joint employment; joint projects; joint training; trained need studies/ research. • Shared information • Purchase of services, contracting out. • Use of premises and facilities (joint premises) • From peripheral, one-off activity to on-going core business (shared objectives, responsibilities and governance)

15. Promoting partnership • Incentives (additional financial incentives?) • Transparency, openness, fairness • Sharing of information and records • Common outcomes as the glue to maintain partnership. • Involving partners in all stages. • Building consensus and mutual trust • Community capacity

16. Central – district linkage • District planning and coordination requires defined central direction, priorities and outcomes (Strategic plan and program plans are not yet in sight). Success of district planning requires effective central planning mechanism, and creative interpretation of central policy direction (two-way communication mechanism). Coordination is a means to an end, not an end itself. • District variations in service do not means service inconsistency and quality differences. • Variations between districts differ on average. There are pockets of deprived neighborhoods even within wealthy district (Wanchai).

17. Consensus building • Effective coordination built on mutual trust between partners. • Foremost task is to build up a “critical mass” at district level. • DO, not a district CEO, with no direct governance and resource allocation authority over NGOs. • Federative structure tends to focus on short-term gains, incremental decisions and specific issues. • Use of persuasion, negotiation, appeals of common interests, resolving conflicts, & compromise, understand the players (reduce negative competition, fair planning process, avoid free-riding)– the political and entrepreneurial skills of DO.

18. NGO re-engineering • Regionalization of large NGOs – facilitate cross program collaboration and district responsiveness. • Building of district partners • Resistance to district coordination work: • Developing interagency collaboration is extremely time-consuming and process-intensive. Resource investment, yet no short term gains. • Cross program collaboration difficult (cultural resistance between program operators) • Threaten agency’s autonomy and turf (small NGO). • Confused agency and worker identity.

19. Multi-skilled Social Workers • District planning requires a more versatile, entrepreneurial and multi-skilled workforce, with a more expanded professional identity beyond traditional category, function and role. • Programs are more outward-looking, proactive and community-based, more prepared and open for joint action.

20. Prospects • Beginning years of district planning, testing out new initiatives. Too early to give a conclusive assessment. • There is no rigid work format, model and future blueprint (end product). • An evolving mechanism, continuously improving based on informed feedback. • In search for a more open, collaborative, and widely participated planning and implementation mechanism. • Collaboration has to be learned (shared resources, information, outcomes) - our awareness of the need of inter-dependency and emphasis on collective goals. Don’t under-estimate the resistance and community diversity.