« Previous | Contents |
Listen
"UNDER THE SKIN" OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
CHAPTER TEN: CONCLUSIONS
COMMUNITY PLANNING AS A CONCEPT
10.1 Community Planning is a complex and multi-dimensional concept that encompasses a number of different principles. It is perceived as being about promoting "joined up" working between organisations in order to develop a shared strategic vision for a geographical area, providing greater opportunities for community participation and encouraging more integrated service delivery across organisational boundaries.
10.2 Given the multi-dimensional nature of the concept, it is understandable that it often means different things to different stakeholders and that some stakeholders place more or less emphasis on one particular dimension. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as it provides a number of different routes for stakeholders to become involved in the process depending on their own interests. However, there is some evidence that stakeholders would like more clarity about the expectations of the Scottish Executive about the role they see Community Planning playing in relation to the wider modernising agenda as well as how it relates to other key policy initiatives. While stakeholders would welcome more clarity about the basic principles underlying Community Planning as a concept there is strong resistance to an over prescriptive approach to the way these principles should be translated into action at a local level.
10.3 The research suggests that key stakeholders involved in Community Planning partnerships have "signed up" to the basic principles underlying the concept. There is also evidence that they are committed to translating these principles into practical action. However, in doing so it is clear that Community Planning partnerships are having to grapple with a number of complex and difficult issues. This emphasises the fact that Community Planning as a concept is essentially a change management process that requires cultural and organisational change as much as new structures and systems. The time, capacity and resources to secure these changes should not be underestimated and it suggests that Community Planning should be viewed as a long-term developmental process rather than another time limited initiative.
10.4 There is a danger that capacity can become equated with commitment. There is a need to recognise that while some partners may be committed to the Community Planning process they may have limited capacity to contribute to the process. This can cause some tensions within partnerships with some partners perceiving a lack of capacity as indicating a lack of commitment to the process. On the other hand, there is also some evidence that some organisations do not perceive Community Planning as part of their "core business" and as a result do not provide the resources required to support the process. Greater encouragement from the Scottish Executive, across all policy departments and divisions, would help ensure that all agencies could contribute effectively to the Community Planning process.
PARTNERSHIP STRUCTURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
10.5 There is no single model of Community Planning partnership and the structures adopted, or being developed, are different in each partnership area. This reflects the fact that structures are being developed to meet local needs and circumstances and in many cases build upon existing partnership arrangements.
10.6 Given that many of the structures adopted by Community Planning partnerships have only recently been established there is clearly scope for further experimentation and learning. However, this needs to be balanced with a strong desire for a degree of stability to allow various groups to mature and develop.
10.7 The leadership role of councils, in developing the Community Planning process, is generally accepted amongst other partners. There are, however, some concerns about the way that this leadership role is being interpreted in some areas. While this concern seems to be based more on perceptions rather than real examples of problems, it is clear that local authorities need be careful about how they exercise their leadership role to ensure that the Community Planning process is as inclusive as possible. The research suggests that partnerships appear to work more effectively where the council adopts a "light touch" approach to their leadership role.
10.8 The research also suggests that some partnerships are struggling to find the most appropriate way to involve community and voluntary sector organisations within their structures. This is often the result of a confusion about the role such representatives are expected to play within various groups. The involvement of community and voluntary sector organisations appears to work best where it is accepted that they are involved as individuals who can bring a different perspective to the work of the partnership. This suggests that they should be seen as representatives from rather than of their particular sectors.
DEVELOPING COMMUNITY PLANNING
10.9 Community Planning may be "an idea whose time has come" but it will also take some time to develop its full potential. Each Community Planning partnership is at a different stage of development but it is clear that as partnerships move from the "easy" process of setting up partnership structures and developing a community plan towards the more detailed implementation stages of the process they are all having to face a number of complex and challenging issues.
10.10 The research suggests that there are three fundamental issues that all partnerships have to address.
- Integration of Community Planning with other planning processes and partnership structures.
- Establishing effective Action Planning and Implementation structures and systems.
- Maximising effective Community Participation in the Community Planning process.
10.11 There is no "right way" of approaching these issues and each Community Planning partnership will need to develop solutions that are tailored to local needs and circumstances. Given the stage of development in most Community Partnership it is not possible to say what approaches work best in practice and it is clear that it will take time to properly evaluate the impact of various approaches. There is, however, scope for greater sharing of information between partnerships to avoid the need to "reinvent the wheel".
10.12 The relationship between health improvement planning and the overarching Community Planning process clearly illustrates some of the difficulties and tensions involved in seeking to integrate major cross-cutting policy themes within the overall Community Planning process. However, the issues raised in this context could apply equally to other cross-cutting policy themes e.g. social inclusion, sustainability etc.
ACHIEVEMENTS OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
10.13 There is limited evidence of tangible outcomes that can be attributed directly to the Community Planning process. Most of the benefits that have been delivered to date relate to intangible process related issues. This does not mean that these achievements should be underestimated. One of the key aims of the Community Planning process is to break down organisational barriers and organisational and cultural changes are a necessary prerequisite to achieving this.
10.14 There is some evidence that Community Planning partnerships are feeling under pressure to demonstrate more tangible results in terms of service outputs or outcomes. This has led many partnerships to identify "quick wins" and also consider rebadging existing partnership activities under the Community Planning "brand". While the desire to demonstrate the impact of community planning is desirable there is a danger that a focus on "hard" output measures of success could be at the expense of the "softer" organisational and cultural changes that are more likely to secure long term and sustainable changes.
BARRIERS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
10.15 If Community Planning is to fulfil its potential there are a number of challenges and barriers that will need to be overcome. One of the key challenges facing all partnerships is being able to create the capacity, space and resources required to support the Community Planning process. This an issue that needs to be addressed by individual partners but there is also a strong feeling that the need to constantly respond to new initiatives from the Scottish Executive, as well as produce numerous plans, policy documents and funding proposals, is deflecting attention from the Community Planning process.
10.16 Another issue that is perceived as deflecting attention from the Community Planning process is the need for many partner agencies to deal with ongoing organisational change. There is also a strong feeling that organisational change within individual organisations or sectors is not always sensitive to the needs of Community Planning and that any future structural changes should be designed to support the process of partnership working at a local level.
10.17 The lack of coterminous boundaries amongst organisations involved in Community Planning partnerships is often cited as a barrier to the development of Community Planning. The research suggests that the main problem related to this issue is the capacity and resources available to organisations that have to support more than one Community Planning partnership, rather than the boundaries themselves. There was certainly no strong support for further changes to organisational boundaries simply to support the Community Planning process although again this should be a criterion that is taken into account if future changes are made to operational boundaries at either a local or national level.
THE FUTURE OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
10.18 Most stakeholders clearly have high expectations for the future development of Community Planning, however, they are also realistic about the scale of some of the challenges they face and the time it may take to fully realise the potential of the process. There are some concerns that these issues may not be fully appreciated at a national level and that there may be pressure to produce "quick results" to demonstrate that Community planning is "working".
10.19 The most important thing that can be done to support the development of Community Planning is to give individual partnerships the time and space to grapple with some of the complex issues they are currently facing. This suggests that any guidance issued by the Scottish Executive should avoid being overly prescriptive and should encourage local innovation and experimentation.
10.20 Many of the challenges facing Community Planning partnerships need to be addressed locally, however, there are a number of issues that need to be addressed at a national level.
10.21 The Scottish Executive can help support the process by clarifying its own expectations about how it sees Community Planning developing and how it relates to the wider modernising government agenda. There is also a need to re-emphasise the fact that Community Planning should be a key priority for all public sector organisations and ensure that this message is communicated effectively and consistently down all policy channels.
10.22 The Scottish Executive can also support the process through actions as well as words. There is a clear need to ensure that it leads by example by demonstrating a "joined up" approach across the Executive and dealing more effectively with cross-cutting issues. It could also demonstrate support for the Community Planning process by ensuring that it is seen as being the main vehicle for delivering collaborative working at a local level and subsequently rationalising the number of other partnership structures that are required by national policy initiatives.
10.23 The Community Planning Task Force has a crucial role to play as an advocate for Community Planning as a concept and as a vehicle for promoting best practice. However, given what has been said about Community Planning being seen as a long term change process, consideration also needs to be given to how these roles can be undertaken at a national level beyond the lifespan of the current Task Force.
« Previous | Contents |