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

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

4. A Brief History
The Hume Region, NE Victoria

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

6. 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

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

8. 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

9. Regional Governance Structure
Partnership Group
Allocation Panel
Subregional Practitioner Forums

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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.

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. Referrers to ECIS
January – June 2012

18. Requests for Primary Consultations- Discipline
April – June 2012

19. Requests for Primary Consultations- Type
April – June 2012

20. Waiting time for Primary Consultations

21. Family Satisfaction (%)
Family Satisfaction Survey Results- Scope

22. 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

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

24. 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?