class 6: program description, community linkages uta school of social work 6371: community ...
DESCRIPTION
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 distributionTRANSCRIPT
Class 6: Program Description, Community Linkages
UTA School of Social Work6371: 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 Classes1. Theories, values, perspectives2. Conditions of Concern & social problems 3. Assessing social conditions/communities4. Evidence based interventions & logic models5. Program descriptions, community linkages6. Program goals and objectives
Overview Governing ideas (Vision, mission, values/guiding
principles)
Intra-agency relationships
Boards and committees
Structure: arrangement of staff/resources
– Constant struggle between centralization and distribution
Learning Objectives Class 6
Explore key contingencies, goals and structure (see contingency model)
Identify and construct vision, mission, guiding principles
Explore external linkages Explore boards and committees Explore internal structures & their use
Types of HSOs Not-for-profit 501c3
– Board of Directors– Articles of Incorporation– Bylaws– Proof of financial support after 5 years– File IRS 990 (on web http://www.guidestar.org/)
Governmental (local, regional, state, US) Religious -- churches For profit Blends of profit and nonprofit
Governing ideas: Vision (concerns agency)
Destiny or what agency/program wants to become if resources plentiful
Where the program wants to be in 10-15 years Discover by client/service scenarios 5-10 years
in future Reveals key opportunities, challenges,
problems & issues Example, Be the best SSW in the Southwest
Governing ideas: Mission (Concerns Services) (KMM p94)
Encapsulates the program’s overall effort The purpose for being or identity Grounded in “customer” needs Grounded in client outcomes Grounded in definition of quality services Easy for public to understand Renewed periodically Example: To educate and equip future social workers
with the knowledge and skills needed for effective practice.
Governing ideas: Values & Guiding Principles
Philosophy/principles guiding the agency/program
Things that will not be compromised
Includes deeply held traditions
Compatible with professional values and ethics
Example: SSW=social and economic justice, empowerment, diversity, etc.
Terms for how Agencies Work TogetherCooperate = very informally work together, e.g., share
resources as office buildingCollaborate = Cooperate + enhance capacity of the other
http://www.tomwolff.com/collaborative-solutions-newsletter-summer-05.htm
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 existNote: 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
http://www.tomwolff.com/collaborative-solutions-newsletter.html
Boards and Committees Way to involve stakeholders Requires diversity (use turnover) Training is necessary ED provides support to board, not controls it Board controls ED, ED controls staff Understand rewards needed by board
members, e.g., positive press, meaningful work, sense of helping, interest in services, etc.
Org structure
Visually presented in charts
Heavily influenced by contingencies (most important=influence of goals of efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability)
Org structure: Types Hierarchical structure
– 6-8 workers per supervisor, best when you can define what people do & accountability is demanded
Matrix structure http://www2.uta.edu/cussn/courses/5306/coursepack/ORGCHART.pdf
– Workers report to functional & product boss, e.g., case manager & director of mental health
Project management (NASA) structure– Flat, many groups, flexible, highly skilled workers,
Network structure– Linked, many teams-NASA, contracts, partnerships,
virtual offices, telecommuting, telecommunications
Org Structure: Contingencies
Goal = accountability People = non skilled Technology = specified Task = routine
Goal = effectiveness People = highly skilled Tech = non specified Task = non-routine
Pyramid/bureaucracy Flat/network
Note: Changing structure is difficult and takes time. A political/value and cultural change must accompany the structural change.
Summary — Program Design
Design is vision/mission driven and operationalized by goals and objectives
Design is a feature of structure or the arrangement of committees and staff
Design is stable, hard to change, and is relatively influenced by contingencies
Feedback
Question and answer session