Future Taranaki

1
Future Taranaki

• Presentation to
• Society of Local Government Managers
• Shared Services Conference
• April 2007

2
What is Future Taranaki?

• Its a collaborative grouping of organisations
  set up to achieve s14 1e of the Local Government
  Act
• a local authority should collaborate and
  co-operate with other local authorities and
  bodies as it considers appropriate to promote or
  achieve its priorities and desired outcomes, and
  make efficient use of resources
• And s91 2d-e
• The purposes of the identification of community
  outcomes
• are
• (d) to promote the better co-ordination and
  application of community resources and
• (e) to inform and guide the setting of priorities
  in relation to the activities of the local
  authority and other organisations.

3
Community Outcomes

• Collaborative approach to outcomes identification
  initiated by Taranaki Regional Council in January
  2003
• Outcomes to be
• identified through robust consultation
• via contractor appointed through tender
• community-centric not council-centric
• discernable in terms of differences in nature
  priority at district level.
• also meaningful at the regional level

4
Community Outcomes

• Cost sharing formula
• Dedicated project manager (part-time)
• Project chaired by TRC Chief Executive
• Multi-faceted consultation
• focus groups
• regional hui
• stakeholders
• public meetings
• telephone survey
• questionnaire to every mailing address

This joined up process allowed for a quality
result that would not have been easily affordable
to any of the councils alone.
5
Taranaki Region

• Taranaki is a geographically distinct region with
  is fairly easily defined borders.
• Its has a rich compelling history,
  particularly around the time of European
  settlement, which affects pakeha/tangata whenua
  relationships to this day.
• Its people have a strong sense of identity with
  the region, as well as with their local towns,
  rural areas surf beaches.
• There is little sense of identity with areas
  defined by territorial local authority borders.
• Taranaki has a strong ethos of pragmatic
  collaboration between a wide range of
  organisations.

6
Future Taranaki

• In identifying their outcomes the Taranaki local
  authorities, contacted
• 52 Businesses business sector organisations
• 24 Services organisations community groups
• 4 Environmental groups
• 8 Education providers
• 36 Govt Ministries, Depts Crown Agencies
• 4 Members of Parliament
• 25 Iwi/hapu organisations
• 48 Maori business service organisations
• 201 entities in total

7
Community Outcomes

• 38 distinct statements, aggregated into 7
  community outcomes
• Prosperous
• Connected
• Skilled
• Sustainable
• Secure Healthy
• Together
• Vibrant

NPDC Outcome set subsequently modified to reflect
local iwi input
8
Same outcomesdifferent priorities
identifying outcome as top priority
9
Importance ? Action
10
Stakeholders

• Due to the thorough process used to identify
  refine the outcomes
• the service delivering agencies capable of
  making significant contributions to progressing
  the outcomes
• were involved in became familiar with the
  process its purpose from an early stage.
• These organisations, whether government agencies,
  not for profits, churches, or local trusts,
  voiced a strong desire to operate at the regional
  level.

11
Actions Lead Organisations
12
Stakeholders

• It was also clear from the nature of the 38
  statements (aggregated into the 7 outcomes) that
  progressing them was well beyond the scope of any
  one stakeholder.
• In July September 2004 two stakeholder meetings
  were held to discuss how we should progress the
  outcomes.
• It was agreed that a smaller group would be
  formed to discuss means of progressing the
  outcomes, with developments reported back to,
  support sought from, the larger group.

13
Future Taranaki

• The smaller group is known as the Future Taranaki
  Facilitation Group, while the larger is the
  Future Taranaki Partners.
• The Facilitation Group agreed a terms of
  reference which, on behalf of the Partners, was
  to
• enable senior level discussions on delivery of
  the outcomes
• set benchmarks performance targets to measure
  progress
• provide a forum for the organisations to
  consider initiatives
• allow active consideration of collaborative
  opportunities
• - commit resources to agreed projects

14
Future Taranaki

• The Future Taranaki Facilitation Group membership
  is
• Ministry of Social Development
• The 4 local authorities (NPDC, STDC, SDC TRC)
• Te Puni Kokiri
• Taranaki District Health Board
• Venture Taranaki (regional economic development
  agency)
• Other Future Taranaki Partners also regularly sit
  in on meetings.

15
Future Taranaki

• The Facilitation Group has continued to meet over
  the last two years has recently prioritised
  three projects to be developed implemented.
  They are in order of priority
• Labour market strategy, in response to acute
  chronic skill shortages, led by STDC, NPDC
  Venture Taranaki. (Skilled Prosperous)
• An evidence based smoking cessation project led
  by the DHB (Secure Healthy)
• A domestic violence reduction project led by MSD
  (Secure Healthy).

16
Is It Working?

• Yes.
• There is widespread buy in to the community
  outcomes.
• It is arguable that some partners treat the
  outcomes with more enthusiasm provide more
  impetus to Future Taranaki than the local
  authorities. We need to build on this.
• The community outcomes also encourage the
  Partners to think outside their traditional
  operations question the relevance of their
  outputs.

17
What Could Work Better?

• Lots
• Opening discussion has begun on structure
  membership.
• The small core Facilitation Group larger
  Partners group arrangement isnt generating
  sufficient communication between the two, or as
  much involvement as the wider group would like.
  This is might also be caused by lack of dedicated
  Future Taranaki personnel.
• The membership of the core group does not reflect
  the breadth of the outcomes.

18
What Could Work Better?

• Lots
• NPDC perspective - insufficient awareness,
  opportunities for involvement, buy-in from our
  elected members. They were not closely involved
  in the regional outcomes identification process
  Future Taranaki is largely paid professionals.
• We need to move the process closer to our elected
  members, but this is difficult as its only the
  local authorities, the DHB some trusts that
  have governance management present locally.

19
What Could Work Better?

• Lots
• There is already a forum of the 3 district
  mayors, the regional chair, local authority chief
  executives and the constituency and list MPs with
  Taranaki responsibilities.
• While informal, this group meets regularly to
  discuss issues of mutual interest and was briefed
  on the community outcomes at its inaugural
  meeting.
• This higher chamber could receive regular
  reports from Future Taranaki, though would not
  provide an accountability and governance
  mechanism as such.
• Accountability could be enhanced with regular
  reporting should be supplied to the councils
  themselves.

20
What Could Work Better?

• Lots
• The Future Taranaki membership is made up of
  senior professionals who have busy day jobs.
  This makes it difficult to maintain day to day
  focus momentum.
• The employment of a dedicated staff resource
  whos role is to further approved interventions
  by coordinating partners, researching, nagging
  managing them will be discussed over the next
  month.

21
What Could Work Better?