Interagency Partnerships as a Foundation for Innovative Service Delivery Sarah Nicolson Genevieve Callander Alisha Forrest

Outline History of the Hume Region Reform Regional Governance Structure Data Collection Innovations and Outcomes Challenges

A Brief History The Hume Region, NE Victoria

A Brief History Review process initiated in July 2009 with major reviews of Central Intake and service delivery Major reform undertaken from January 2010

Why did we do it? Lack of consistency across the region DEECD Literature Review released about effective practice Systemic inefficiency Families receiving services from multiple agencies Not guided by evidence and best practice

What is the Model? Strengthening of Central Intake and Early Support processes Key Worker transdisciplinary approach Utilisation of primary and secondary consultations

What made it possible? A history of collaboration across agencies Equal participation by all agency managers and DEECD Paced implementation Leadership which models openness and respect A governance structure which supports practitioners

Regional Governance Structure Partnership Group Allocation Panel Subregional Practitioner Forums

Regional Governance Structure Strong lines of communication between the managers at the Partnership Group and the practitioners at the Sub Regional Practitioner Forums enables Practitioners to raise issues or questions The Partnership Group to inform Practitioners of issues Professional development needs to be fed up and down between the two forums

Regional Governance Structure Ongoing communication of issues between the managers at the Partnership Group and the Team Leaders and Supervisors at the Allocation Panel enables Team Leaders and Supervisors to raise issues that are impacting on practice Partnership Group decisions to be informed by the experience of those directly engaged in providing the service

Regional Governance Structure The partnership structure has promoted a sense of connection and allegiance across agencies and between practitioners, team leaders and managers. Importantly this has contributed to a positive engagement of the practitioners who have felt involved in the reforms, supported in changes of practice and an allegiance to the new model.

Central Intake and Early Support Strengthening Central Intake and Early Support Home Visits Attention to Eligibility Responsive Early Support Initial Family Services and Support Plan

Data Agreement between agencies regarding the collection of data on key worker numbers and primary consultations. Only clients for whom the provider is key worker is counted for Funding and Service Agreement purposes Primary consultation data is collected within the region Agreement to collate and review this data on a quarterly basis

Data The quarterly review of data by the Partnership Group informs The professional development and training needs of the practitioners Recruitment decisions Managing capacity and demand issues across the region Agency review and self monitoring

What data do we collect? EFT by sub region, agency and discipline Referral information Referral list demographics Referral source Outcome of referral (including eligibility) Key Worker caseloads Allocations and Closures Requests for Primary Consultations Discipline Request Type Waiting time

Referrers to ECIS January – June 2012

Requests for Primary Consultations- Discipline April – June 2012

Requests for Primary Consultations- Type April – June 2012

Waiting time for Primary Consultations

Family Satisfaction (%) Family Satisfaction Survey Results- Scope 2010 - 2012

Innovations Outcomes Implementation of the transdisciplinary key worker model Redeveloped Central Intake and Early Support team Practitioner guidelines across the region. Responsiveness to Primary Consultation requests across agencies. Internal data collection Clear definitions of goals and strategies documented in the FSSP. Using COPM and GAS to support the planning process. Family Outcomes Survey Clarity of role for practitioners and families. Improved communication and connectedness with other services. Sustainable work load as a key worker and consultant. Fast response rate to primary consultation request. Primary consultation requests informing professional learning. Clear identification of goals and strategies for families and practitioners. Measuring effectiveness of intervention

Challenges Regional and rural service provision Workforce Engagement with referrers and other universal services Supporting families System/organisational issues

What would the ideal model look like? Reform process implemented within the context of an existing service provided by seven agencies. Has not included major changes to workforce and resourcing. How would it look if we could build a new model from the ground up?