TACH

Workforce Development and Training Plan

for

Neighbourhood and Community Houses

2014 - 2015

Contents

Introduction

Background to the Tasmanian Association of Community Houses

Background to the TACH Workforce Development Project

Scope of the Workforce Plan

Snapshot of Key Survey Findings

Key Skill Gaps:

Key Recurring Issues for Training Participation:

Priority Areas

PRIORITY 1. TRAINING NEEDS

PRIORITY 2: TRAINING RELATIONSHIPS

PRIORITY 3. TRAINING PROVISION

PRIORITY 4: EXTEND THE TACH WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

TACH Workforce Development Action Plan 2014 – 2015

PRIORITY 1. TRAINING NEEDS

PRIORITY 2: TRAINING RELATIONSHIPS

PRIORITY 3. TRAINING PROVISION

PRIORITY 4: EXTEND THE TACH WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Tables

Table 1: Identified Key Skills Gap Area

Table 2: Key recurring issues for training participation

Appendix

Appendix 1Sector Survey Report

Appendix 2‘Working with Houses’ checklist

Appendix 3 ‘Working with Houses’ MoU

Appendix 4Workforce Plan

Introduction

This Workforce Development and Training Plan is part of a set of documents generated by the TACH Workforce Development Project. This Plan is informed by the Sector Survey Report (Appendix 1) and Project Action Plan (page 21).

The Neighbourhood House sector is a complex, eclectic and ever changing environment, and as such, there isno singular approach to addressing its workforce issues and training needs. TACH seeks to assist in creating a flexible, creative, informed approach to training and workforce development within the Neighbourhood House sector, and this Project has provided the evidence base and first steps to proactively move forward.

Background to the Tasmanian Association of Community Houses

The Tasmanian Association of Community Houses Inc.(TACH) is the sector peak body for Neighbourhood Houses in Tasmania. There are 34 TACH member Houses, 33 of which receive their core funding through the State Government’s Department of Health and Human Services.

The TACH mission is to strengthen the capacity of Neighbourhood Houses to meet their community’s needs.

The TACH vision is for highly effective Neighbourhood Houses to be contributing to creating supportive and flourishing communities.

(NB. TACH network members are referred to as Community Houses, Community Centres, Neighbourhood Houses and Neighbourhood Centres. Within the Workforce Development Plan they will be referred to collectively as Houses.)

Houses work at the grass roots within Tasmania’s most disadvantaged communities, with community development as their core business. They are guided in practice by the Tasmanian Government’s Neighbourhood House Program Strategic Framework 2013-2018. Within the Strategic Framework the following characteristics are identified as essential for the operation of a House:

  • it operates with an ‘open door’ policy where all community members are welcomed and treated equally and with respect
  • it increases life opportunities and pathways to enrich the quality of life in the local community by facilitating the social, cultural, learning and creative development of individuals and families in either an informal or formal atmosphere
  • it fosters family support, community advancement and adult learning opportunities

Houses are required to report annually to the Department, addressing the 4 key goals of the Neighbourhood House Program and their individual strategic plans.

These key goals are:

  1. Build community
  2. Support people and families
  3. Enhance participation choices
  4. Local governance and management

Houses provide and create opportunities for people disengaged from their community to make connections through a wide variety of social and volunteer opportunities: playgroups, community gardens, festivals, markets, non-accredited training sessions, volunteer community services etc. For many people in these communities formal education was a bad experience, and Houses play a vital role in bridging the gap back into formal education and learning environments.

TACH is a member of the Australian Neighbourhood Houses and Centres Association (ANHCA) which is the national peak body for Neighbourhood Houses. ANCHA conducts an annual national survey of Houses across Australia.

A snapshot of Tasmanian results from the 2012 survey shows:

  • 113 people participate in programmed activities at each House each week
  • This equates to 3842 people across Tasmania each week
  • 340 participants across Tasmania were assisted with transition to further education in the previous 12 months
  • 102 volunteers across Tasmania were assisted with transition to further education in the previous 12 months
  • 170 participants were assisted with transition to paid work in the previous 12 months
  • 40 volunteers were assisted with transition to paid work in the previous 12 months

A snapshot of Tasmanian results from the 2013 survey shows:

  • Approximately 225 people visit each House each week
  • This equates to 7639 people across Tasmania using a House each week
  • Approximately 18 people volunteer at each House each week
  • This equates to 610 volunteers each week across Tasmania, with an estimated 3,800 hours a week of volunteer time at Houses
  • Approximately 85 paid staff hours are worked per week at each House
  • This equates to 2,903 paid work hours a week across Tasmania
  • There is approximately 897 more volunteer hours worked each week than paid staff hours

Background to the TACH Workforce Development Project

This Workforce Development Project was initiated by TACH to develop a map of the training needs of the staff, volunteers (including job seeker volunteers) and community participants in Houses, and to identify ways to source and deliver training to best address these needs.

Another key driver for initiating the Project was the opportunity to gather evidence regarding the deep dissatisfaction of Houses with previous poor training delivery experiences, such as a Registered Training Organisation (RTO) changing training delivery arrangements without negotiation with the learner; assessment requirements being inconsistent for different learners for the same unit; and the trainer not understanding the House context so they are not able to deliver relevant training or assessment criteria.

The evidence gathered supported what has long been anecdotally known – that Houses have received the short end of the training stick time and time again.

TACH has found that where they have had an active role in shaping the content of training there have been better results for Houses, such as governance training in 2011 that was tailored specifically to House management committee needs. TACH is aware that due to no existing coordination of engagement with RTOs, nor the capacity themselves to proactively plan for future funding rounds, that in the past either rushed or inappropriate tenders have been created for the network that have not delivered the desired result, or that potential opportunities have been missed.

TACH wants to capitalise on what has been learnt through this Project to support and build better relationships with RTOs and training providers, and more importantly, improved experiences for Neighbourhood Houses and those engaging with training through them.

Scope of the Workforce Plan

Overview

The Tasmanian Association of Community Houses (TACH) workforce plan is for the 34 Neighbourhood Houses that make up the TACH network across Tasmania, and covers all paid staff, volunteers, and the broader community membership of Houses. Neighbourhood Houses (also referred to as neighbourhood centre, community centre, and community house) are funded through the State Government’s Department of Health & Human Services, under a strict funding criteria. They are required to report annually to the Department, addressing their individual strategic plans.

Houses are located in low socio-economic and socially isolated areas by intent, and are run by a community governance model. This means that each House has a management committee made up of local community members who volunteer their time to oversee the overall House management and employ staff as required. Each House has a paid coordinator who oversees the daily running of the House. All Houses are autonomous, incorporated bodies. They each run their own set of programs and projects according to their local community interests and needs. Houses are run by the community, for the community.

The role of TACH is to provide information and advice to Houses, to guide, support and identify potential opportunities for Houses to pursue. As the peak body, TACH advocates and lobbies for the sector.

The TACH mission is to strengthen the capacity of Neighbourhood Houses to meet their community’s needs.

The TACH vision is for highly effective Neighbourhood Houses to be contributing to creating supportive and flourishing communities.

Key Workforce Planning Stakeholders

The key workforce planning stakeholders are:

  • Coordinators
  • Other paid staff
  • Volunteers (general)
  • Volunteers (management committees)
  • TACH
  • Department of Health & Human Services
  • Department of Education - Skills Tasmania

Internal Scan

  • There has been an increase in the program and service delivery of Houses, and an increase in the demand for these programs and services. The issue is will Houses have the people capacity to match the delivery requirements? This includes having the numbers of people with the required skills to do the tasks required.
  • Houses received on-going recurrent funding in 2011, enabling them to employ the equivalent of 1.5 full time staff. Some Houses increased the number of paid hours for existing staff, while others introduced new, extra part time paid positions. Consequences of this include increased workloads for some staff, and increased personnel in others, requiring a higher level of managerial and HR skills.
  • The responsibilities of the volunteer management committees have increased with the rise in funding as well as the reporting requirements to DHHS. They are required to adhere to the Neighbourhood House Program Strategic Framework 2013-2018.
  • New expected DHHS reporting requirements to outcomes based funding will require extra, specific training and work responsibilities.
  • Houses undertake specialised projects supported by funding sourced from different avenues. The size and scope of these projects varies broadly between Houses, but all add extra responsibilities and reporting requirements for those involved.

External Scan

  • The current Liberal state government is committed to funding the NH Program and supports the community development model of service delivery of Houses, however the current funding service agreements expire at the end of the 2015 financial year.
  • Population changes in the local area of Houses. People move out as industries close. Will there be enough volunteers to fill committee positions, and enough participants to make programs viable?
  • Social impacts on Houses putting demands on their services that they are not funded for, such as people going to Houses to use their phones and computers to lodge their Centrelink claims; supervising individuals undertaking community service hours; assisting in disaster recovery.
  • Social pressure on Houses increasing from governments and other sectors to participate in their projects/support their programs, which adds extra burden to Houses.

Snapshot of Key Survey Findings

Key Skill Gaps:

The table below is a summary of the key skill gap areas as identified in the Sector Survey Report (Appendix 1). The recurring areas identified for training needs include, but are not limited to, those listed.

Table 1: Identified Key Skills Gap Area

Topic Area / Identified Key Skill Gap Areas / Coordinators / Staff / Volunteers / Committee
Community Development / Community development
Community consultation
Community needs analysis
Governance / Governance
Management skills
Minute taking
Facilitating meeting
Roles & responsibilities of volunteers
Strategic planning
Succession Planning
Working with a Committee
Risk management
Workplace management / Negotiation/conflict resolution
Volunteer management
Staff management
Working with challenging behaviours
Team effectiveness
Mentoring
Leadership / Leadership
Coordination skills
Time management
Networking
Advocacy
Project management/evaluation
Research & evaluation
Meeting facilitation
Interpersonal skills
The Basics / Mental health first aid
IT
Financial management
First Aid
OH&S
Safe food handling
Budgeting
Grant writing
Report writing
Lobbying
Presentation skills
Promotion and marketing
Literacy (own and others)
Financial counselling
Communication skills
MYOB
Social media
Healthy food preparation

To address the identified key skill gap areas, training could be provided as full, accredited qualifications, skills sets, individual units or non-accredited training. Existing training or potential qualifications which have units that provide the skills required include, but are not limited to:

Certificate 1: Business; Work Preparation

Certificate 2: Community Services; Skills for Work & Vocational Pathways; Horticulture

Certificate 3: Community Services Work; Financial Services; Business

Certificate 4: Community Services Work; Frontline Management; Volunteer Program Coordination

Diploma: Community Services Coordination; Community Development

TasCOSS Governance Series of workshops

St Vincent de Paul Fresh Start program

NILS training

Tasmanian Medicare Local Connecting Ideas and Process (CIP) training

Local Council safe food handling programs

St John’s First Aid training

Worksafe Tasmania

Key Recurring Issues for Training Participation:

The table below is a summary of the identified factors affecting the training experience for past participants, and act as barriers for those looking to engage with training. A full descriptive summary is in the Sector Survey Report (Appendix 1)

Houses are well placed to address many of the issues and needs raised such as location, safe environment, and supportive relationships as they provide inclusive environments.

Table 2: Key recurring issues for training participation

Factor / Issues
Time / Travel time
Duration of training
Time away from workplace required
Time required to complete assessments – is it in work or own time?
Time of day training delivered
Extra time requirements over normal work/volunteer hours
Travel & Transport / Cost of travel
Availability of transport options (public or private) to the training site
Trainer / Unreliable, changing appointments at short notice
Not ‘knowing their stuff’ about the sector or community development
Little to no communication or support, leading to poor relationship
Little to no feedback on work submitted for assessment
Different styles and expectations of assessment content between trainers
Trainers change resulting in lack of continuity and consistency of assessment
No communication or negotiation from RTO or trainer regarding changes to arrangements
Training Delivery / Fixed, centralised location and inflexible times of delivery
Lack of clear course content and expected outcomes
Content not relevant to workplace or role
Unclear, delayed enrolment process
Unclear or no induction process
Cost
Training Assessment / Inconsistency of assessment requirements across same course/unit
Inconsistent application of RPL process
Lack of relevant, work related assessment
Requirements inflexible to different learning styles and needs
Location of
Training / Travel time and costs
Transport availability and costs
Available, affordable childcare
Unfamiliar, intimidating surrounds
Other / Previous education experiences impacting on motivation
Lack of confidence
Literacy level skills
Awareness of potential training options

Priority Areas

The TACH Workforce Development Plan was formulated as a response to the sector survey into the training needs and experiences of House staff and volunteers.

The Plan identifies 4 Priority Areas:

1. Training Needs

2. Training Relationships

3. Training Provision

4. Extension of the Project

The progress in addressing each Priority Area is outlined below.

PRIORITY 1. TRAINING NEEDS

  • TACH has identified that the training needs of House staff and volunteers need to be dealt with separately to the training needs of local communities.
  • Establishing the training needs of communities requires further exploration beyond the limitations of the current survey.
  • TACH has identified that there are training requirements specific to the management committee volunteers.

What we have learnt:

The training needs of the Sector are broad and varied, and directly affected by the relatively high turnover of staff, particularly the turnover of volunteers on the management committees.

The complexity of training needs of the House sector is due to the fact that it is not just about workers and their roles as defined by duty statements (which vary across Houses) but includes the breadth of volunteer skills, interest and knowledge as well. TACH is looking to support the complexity of training needs of volunteers and the community, as well as the paid workforce.

Therefore, a blanket offering of a single option of training does not work and is not the most effective means of offering training for the sector.

Coordinators and staff:

The existing qualifications and skills that coordinators bring to a House are broad and varied, and this is valued by the sector. An argument for not having a minimum entry qualification is that it allows for pathways into paid positions, with the worker then undertaking a qualification as appropriate to existing experience and the skills required at the House.

Training needs of staff and volunteers are driven by the needs of the Houses and the requirements in delivering programs, projects and services relevant to that community.

Volunteers:

Training needs of volunteers are also driven by the desire of Houses to provide pathways for individuals to learn new skills and expand potential choices for further training or employment. Houses provide a safe entry point for volunteers to become skilled up in the community sector, and through this volunteer involvement create potential pathways into the broader employment sector.

Local communities:

Training needs of local communities are broad, complex and driven by industry issues, including workforce demand. Houses are potential avenues to provide, for example pathways, foundation employment skills, Jobseeker training and support skills such as literacy and numeracy, but not in a position, as a general rule, to address the training needs of a community. The scope of general community training, beyond the House community, is too large and variable for this Project to explore further at this stage.