Class 6: Program Description, Community Linkages UTA School of Social Work 6371: Community & Administrative Practice Dr. Dick Schoech Copyright 2009 (permission required before use) Suggest printing slides for class using: Print | Handouts | 3 slides per page | grayscale options

Review of Previous Classes 1. Theories, values, perspectives 2. Conditions of Concern & social problems 3. Assessing social conditions/communities 4. Evidence based interventions & logic models 5. Program descriptions, community linkages 6. Program goals and objectives

Overview s Governing ideas (Vision, mission, values/guiding principles) s Intra-agency relationships s Boards and committees s Structure: arrangement of staff/resources –Constant struggle between centralization and distribution

Learning Objectives Class 6 s Explore key contingencies, goals and structure (see contingency model) s Identify and construct vision, mission, guiding principles s Explore external linkages s Explore boards and committees s Explore internal structures & their use

Types of HSOs s Not-for-profit 501c3 –Board of Directors –Articles of Incorporation –Bylaws –Proof of financial support after 5 years –File IRS 990 (on web s Governmental (local, regional, state, US) s Religious -- churches s For profit s Blends of profit and nonprofit

Governing ideas: Vision (concerns agency) s Destiny or what agency/program wants to become if resources plentiful s Where the program wants to be in years s Discover by client/service scenarios 5-10 years in future s Reveals key opportunities, challenges, problems & issues s Example, Be the best SSW in the Southwest

Governing ideas: Mission (Concerns Services) (KMM p94) s Encapsulates the program’s overall effort s The purpose for being or identity s Grounded in “customer” needs s Grounded in client outcomes s Grounded in definition of quality services s Easy for public to understand s Renewed periodically s Example: To educate and equip future social workers with the knowledge and skills needed for effective practice.

Governing ideas: Values & Guiding Principles s Philosophy/principles guiding the agency/program s Things that will not be compromised s Includes deeply held traditions s Compatible with professional values and ethics s Example: SSW=social and economic justice, empowerment, diversity, etc.

Terms for how Agencies Work Together Cooperate = very informally work together, e.g., share resources as office building Collaborate = Cooperate + enhance capacity of the other Coordinate = collaborate + modify activities for common purpose & mutual benefit Integrate = develop a system of agencies united by goals, e.g., human services integration movement Note: No agreement on terms exist Note: Easier to integrate with technology/information than by personnel, structure, or tasks.

Terms for Agencies that Work Together Networks = Working independently for the same goals (human services network) Coalitions or Alliances = formal agreements to collaborate but keep separate identities (alliance for the mentally ill) Partnerships = joint venture, several working together as one (Partnership for health)

Terms for tools to work together Agreements = more formal, something written Contracts = official, formal, written, signed by all parties Mergers = two agency are officially and legally becoming one

Boards and Committees s Way to involve stakeholders s Requires diversity (use turnover) s Training is necessary s ED provides support to board, not controls it s Board controls ED, ED controls staff s Understand rewards needed by board members, e.g., positive press, meaningful work, sense of helping, interest in services, etc.

Org structure s Visually presented in charts s Heavily influenced by contingencies (most important=influence of goals of efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability)

Org structure: Types s Hierarchical structure –6-8 workers per supervisor, best when you can define what people do & accountability is demanded s Matrix structure –Workers report to functional & product boss, e.g., case manager & director of mental health s Project management (NASA) structure –Flat, many groups, flexible, highly skilled workers, s Network structure –Linked, many teams-NASA, contracts, partnerships, virtual offices, telecommuting, telecommunications

Org Structure: Contingencies s Goal = accountability s People = non skilled s Technology = specified s Task = routine s Goal = effectiveness s People = highly skilled s Tech = non specified s Task = non-routine Pyramid/bureaucracyFlat/network Note: Changing structure is difficult and takes time. A political/value and cultural change must accompany the structural change.

Summary — Program Design s Design is vision/mission driven and operationalized by goals and objectives s Design is a feature of structure or the arrangement of committees and staff s Design is stable, hard to change, and is relatively influenced by contingencies

Feedback s Question and answer session