Case studies - Staffing a Collaborative Project
Action for Change and Addaction
Sunshine Healthy Living Project
South London CVS Partnership
The South London Council for Voluntary Service (SLCVS) Partnership covers Bromley, Croydon, Kingston-upon-Thames, Merton, Richmond upon Thames and Sutton.
The Partnership exists to:
- facilitate and provide representation for the voluntary and community sector at sub-regional level
- facilitate sharing of best practice, skills and expertise
- establish and develop relationships with sub-regional/regional bodies
- develop common policy positions and operational strategies reflecting the diversity of the sub-region
Staff working on the partnership project
There is a manager and three staff. Richmond CVS (RCVS) employs them on behalf of the six CVS. Three of the staff are funded by the Association of London Government and the fourth, a Workforce Development Manager, is funded by the London South Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and ChangeUp.
Richmond CVS receives a management fee for employing the staff, administering the budget and overseeing the other three staff.
The staff were initially based at RCVS, but now work from an independent office, albeit in a building managed by RCVS.
Accountability for the project
The Directors of the six CVS from these boroughs are responsible for the governance of the Partnership.
Working as an informal partnership not constituted as a separate legal entity, the Partnership aims to constantly review how it communicates with CVS and their trustees about its work, so that it is seen as there for all the CVS. Richmond CVS never chairs the meetings of the Partnership, in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
Some success factors
Jacqui Finn, Partnership Manager, feels that the following have contributed to the success of the project:
- Clear accountability for different areas of work
The Director of each CVS is accountable for one area of the Partnership's work - this helps ensure that the Partnership is seen as a shared resource. - Separate identity
Partnership staff are in their own office, with their own e-mail addresses and website - this has helped to establish the Partnership's identity, itsneutrality and independence. - Annual review of business plan
The Business Plan is reviewed at an annual residential event for the CVS Directors and key partnership staff. Not only does this help ensure clarity of aims and objectives, but it also gives dedicated time for staff to get to know each other and their priorities. - Capable staff
As with any project, whether in partnership or not, a critical factor in its success is employing staff, with the right mix of skills, experience and qualities.
Accountability matrix for South London CVS Partnership
Minimising potential problems
Jacqui Finn has identified three areas of potential difficulty:
- Clarity of decision making and accountability
One area of potential difficulty is bidding for new projects. Problems can arise if all parties in the Partnership do not jointly consider any possible new project and specifically the commitments that the new project is likely to require. Jacqui says that the Partnership has become better at clarifying who is responsible and accountable for what; and at making sure that all affected parties have a say in which new projects to bid for/take on. - Support needs
When new projects are taken on, it is easy to overlook the support needs of the new project worker. For example, that worker will need some office equipment, a desk, stationery and may well need some administrative support from existing administration staff. Jacqui suggests that when taking on any new partnership project, it is important to consider not just the immediate requirements to staff the project, but also the likely support needs. - Communication with affected staff in different CVS
Insufficient communication with the staff in each CVS about actual and potential new projects can be a problem. Jacqui explained the scenario where a new project may be taken on by SLCVS Partnership and be agreed at Director level. However, it is at the level of individual project staff in each CVS that additional or different work may need to be taken on and buy-in from these staff is therefore essential.
- The Partnership and its activities are an agenda item at the meetings of trustee boards and staff teams in each CVS.
- Jacqui and her team attend the staff meetings of each CVS at least once a year.
- Jacqui personally goes to a staff meeting at each CVS every year to explain the areas of development work of the Partnership over the coming year.
Action for Change and Addaction
This project involved a smaller local organisation (Action for Change) working with Addaction, a national organisation, to jointly provide services for drug and alcohol users in Brighton. The driver for jointly producing services was the opportunity to tender for a number of substance misuse services with a local Drug Advisory Team.The project is now at an end, having finished in March 2006.
John Reading, Chief Executive at Action for Change, feels that the project worked well. He says that "there were no staffing problems, of any greater depth or complexity than one would get from working with your own employees inside your own services."
Staff employed on the collaborative project
An overall project manager co-ordinated the project and was employed by Addaction. Project staff reporting to the project manager were employed by both Addaction and Action for Change.
Project staff were put onto the Addaction payscale, but other terms and conditions were those of the employing organisation. Some terms and conditions were different - for example annual leave was lower in Action for Change, but Action for Change staff had a more favourable pension scheme. These differences have not, in practice, caused any particular problems.
Accountability for the project
A joint management board consisting of the Action for Change CEO and the area manager of Addaction had responsibility for the project and for joint supervision of the operational project manager. The operational project manager was accountable for the delivery of the project.
Some success factors
- A commitment to working together
John Reading feels that one of the key factors leading to success in the project was a genuine commitment from all parties to work together - "there is no room for being parochial". For example, if there was a particular employment issue such as a grievance that needed to be dealt with, all partners would be involved in resolving it. Such an approach ensured consistency, avoided miscommunications and led to better decision making. - Joint supervision
Joint supervision of the project manager ensured that both parties were involved and clear about what was to be achieved. This was identified by both organisations as a key success factor: "it's the one thing that has allowed the partnership to flourish: joint supervision and one manager." - Accountability is more important than who employs you
John's view is that who is the employer of the project staff is an administrative matter; accountability is the important thing.
The project manager was given clear accountability for project delivery. The project staff (regardless of which organisation employed them) were accountable for delivering on their part of the project and were accountable to the project manager.
A strong message was given to staff that they should focus on their accountability to the project manager and to the client group, rather than focusing on who employed them. Project staff did indeed generally view themselves as working for only one project.
Accountability matrix for Addaction and Action for Change
Minimising potential problems
- Some formal written arrangements
John Reading sees dangers in writing things down in too much detail but also feels that formal arrangements need to be in place - "lots relies on the goodwill of the individuals involved, but it needs to be bigger than the individuals". - Clarity from the outset
John feels that it is important that both partners are absolutely clear as to what the project is about, from the outset. Next time, he feels he might attend director and trustee meetings at the other organisation(s) in the Partnership, to explain the project, as well as doing this within his own organisation. - Try and make the project robust enough to deal with key players leaving
Another possible problem is where key players leave. There is no clear solution to this, but the extent of joint working, communication and co-operation already established helped sustain the project when there were staffing changes.
Collaborative projects in the future at Action for Change
Action for Change continues to work collaboratively. For example, the organisation has just advertised a new post which will work as part of a service involving four different organisations. Action for Change will be the employer, the post will be operationally managed by another service, will receive funding via the third service and will be based in the fourth service.
Sunshine Healthy Living project
The Sunshine Healthy Living Project is a cluster of ten voluntary and statutory, large and small, local, regional and national organisations. All partners are independent' but have come together under the umbrella of a healthy living project', funded by the Big Lottery Fund, to deliver a range of services within a clearly defined geographical rural area around Salisbury. The services delivered range from community gardens, to healthy living programmes for people with a learning disability, a healthy cooking skills course for elderly people, and disability advice work.
Staff working on the project
There is a project manager and an assistant who manage, capacity build, monitor and support the delivery of the whole project and the Partnership itself.
Accountability for the project
Salisbury CVS is the accountable body for the project. It receives and distributes the money from the Big Lottery Fund on behalf of the Partnership. It also provides information and statistics back to the Big Lottery Fund. Salisbury CVS employs the project manager and an assistant.
The Project Manager, Jane Morgan, reports to the Chief Executive of Salisbury CVS. However she says that it is she rather than the Chief Executive who is in practice accountable for the Sunshine Healthy Living Project and is accountable to the ten partner organisations. The partner organisations are also accountable back to Jane for producing information and statistics on their projects.
There is a small project steering group, consisting of the Salisbury CVS Chief Executive, one delivery partner, the local authority and the local Primary Care Trust (PCT). The steering group has been set up as an advisory, rather than a decision-making body. In practice, however, partner organisations tend to agree with the recommendations of the steering group. Jane Morgan feels that despite its lack of formal authority, it is the steering group that has the most influence over the project.
Some success factors
- Forging links and better communication
The project staff are able to provide project partners with information and advice that would not otherwise be available. This has the potential to reduce the isolation that staff in individual partner organisations may otherwise experience. Jane comments that in some cases, strong links have been forged between partner members. - Partnership agreement
It is useful to have a partnership agreement, so all are clear as to how the partnership will work. - Influential individuals on the steering group
It has helped to have some influential individuals on the steering group. Jane Morgan says that this is not to do with size of organisation - individuals from very small organisations can be influential. - Central management structure
Having some sort of central management structure in such a loose collective partnership seems to be key to success. Investing time in regular partnership reviews and away days has been an effective way of charting the progress of the Partnership.
Minimising potential problems
Maintaining interest/active involvement in the project
One particular barrier has been to maintain interest/active involvement in the project. Unlike a partnership between two organisations, with a specific joint project in mind, this is a partnership of ten organisations, where a wide range of project activities are undertaken. Some project partners are actively involved in the overall Partnership and attend its meetings.
Related to this is the fact that the project is now in year four of its five-year funding. There are now particular challenges in terms of encouraging ongoing interest in the overall project from the partner organisations as individual projects are drawing to a close.
To address these problems, Jane aims to promote the activities and benefits of the project on an ongoing basis.
Accountability
Staff in the individual projects are accountable to their managers in the projects. This is a potential barrier; if Jane Morgan, as Project Manager, identifies any performance concerns, she cannot address them directly but must go through the individual's line manager. This has the potential for miscommunication to occur. Again, Jane suggests that ongoing communications and discussion are the best ways of dealing with this.
Project manager involvement in initial recruitment
Jane Morgan says that, whilst she is overall project manager, she was not involved in initial recruitment of staff in the individual projects. At the time of recruitment, it was felt that this work was best done by each partner organisation. Jane feels that if she were doing the project again, she would become more involved in the recruitment stage to help assess the skills that may be required, and also to make clear to new recruits that they are part of the wider project as well as their own organisation.
