Collaborate For Inclusion - Presentation Transcript
Collaborate for Inclusion Elizabeth Gray-King Gray-King & Gray Ltd GKG Collective
Why inclusion? – The Carrot
Why Inclusion?
Power not disempowerment
Engagement in societies
Embedded transformation
Why Collaboration?
Less isolation
Stronger results
Model of community
Why inclusion? – The big stick
White Paper, Strong and prosperous communities – Duty by April 2009
Duty to ensure people have greater opportunities to have their say
aspiration is to embed a culture of engagement and empowerment
By information provision, consultation and involvement across all LA functions
A group passionate about inclusion
The GKG Collective
“ We’re the GKG Collective, gathering around the achievable vision of inclusion, involvement and engagement.”
NEP
National Empowerment Partnership
Government partnership to share good practice about involvement at local, regional and national levels
In first few operational months of longer initiatives
Needed quick appraisal to move forward
NEP Eval Collaborative inclusion
Created a multi method plan of data collection
Interviews
Survey Monkey questionnaire
Teleconference
Learning Exchange
NEPeval website
Key collaborations
Teleconference
NEP eval web 2 website
Learning Exchange
Teleconference
From initial findings, slide design of core questions
Booked telephone conferences, with each participant looking at the same set of slides
Teleconference host recorded conversations
Linked people across the country
“ The most involved I have ever felt!!!”
One of the questions: There are some fairly strong feelings about using NI4 as an indicator: “ The potential for interpretation makes it (NI4) utterly invalid. It depends on what side of bed you got out of ….. I don’t think its going to drive any real work on community empowerment, it will drive a whole marketing campaign to get people to think they have influence ” You need a combination of different types of approaches. There is a lot of discussion about NI 4 which is one measure of perception and its probably the best proxy. Measuring is definitely difficult. There are two further questions – what are the proportion of decisions that are influenced by local people and secondly whether that is a better decision or not . Question: How can the different views on evaluation been accommodated in the partnership?
NEP Eval Website
Web 2 format
upload easily from
Flickr
Scribd
Slideshow
YouTube
Comment easily in real time
Prototype for evaluation updates, learning exchanges, good practice
http://nepeval.net
Learning Exchange
“ The power is in the analysis”
Started with group ground rules:
On post its – what could get in the way of a constructive group environment today? Cluster and turn into positive principles
Moved to milling around data sources
Subject analysis
Finished with Opinion Lines
Other Examples
The Big Boost
Trained Award winners to collect own data
On – line survey
Participation at BB events
Interviews
Learning Exchange
Where Next
Started with Associates
Then moved to Trustees and staff facilitated exchange
ICT Collaboration
Communities of interest as well as geography
Involvement at appropriate levels
No replacement for tangible relationships
Immediate input/updates in real time
Potential to gather evidence easily (event, photos, upload – done!)
Collaborative inclusion
Those affected by decisions/information/services help design them and then
0 comments
Post a comment