Conferencereportoct2010

432 views

Published on

The report of community cohesion conference held by Diversity House in Swale on 6th October 2010

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
432
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Conferencereportoct2010

  1. 1. Conference Report Report By: Christine Locke
  2. 2. Acknowledgements Thank you to all workshop facilitators and participants for taking the time to get involved and put forward their ideas for improving community cohesion in Swale for Kent. My special thanks go to the South East Coastal Communities (SECC) and HEFCE for their financial support. I thank Swale Borough Council for its financial contribution through the community cohesion grant. I would also like to thank Mr. Abdool Kara, Chief Executive of Swale Borough Council; Professor Ted Cantle CBE, Institute of Community Cohesion; Vanessa Walker of I&DEA; Dr. Carlos Moreno, the University of Greenwich; Chris Bryant, Emma Wiggins, Kirsty Gaunt, Swale Borough Council; Sarah Williams, Swale CVS; Adam Lott, NHS Community Services for their spirit of joint working, shared enthusiasm for involving in the community cohesion project. I would like to thank all the trustees, volunteers and members of Diversity House for the undivided support and commitment to community cohesion. 2 | P a g e
  3. 3. AGENDA – COMMUNITY COHESION COMES TO SWALE FOR KENT TIME ACTIVITY PRESENTED BY 9.30 Registration and refreshments 10.00 Welcome and Introduction Christine Locke Chair Diversity House 10.10 Chief Executive’s Vision and Local Perspective Abdool Kara Swale Borough Council Chief Executive 10.30 Community Cohesion –The National Perspective Prof. Ted Cantle CBE Institute of Community Cohesion (iCoCo) Associate Director, Local Government, Improvement and Development (LGI&D) 11.15 Coffee Break/networking 11.35 Workshops Feedback Facilitators 12.45 Lunch and networking 1.30 Voluntary Sector Involvement and Community Cohesion Sarah Williams Swale Council for Voluntary Services 2.00 Workshops Facilitators 3.00 Coffee Break 3.20 Plenary Session/Evaluation Christine Locke 4.00 Close Christine Locke 3 | P a g e
  4. 4. 1.0. Report Summary Diversity House is a ‘Not for Profit’ company limited by guarantee and also has a registered charity status. The charity's aims including the changes or differences it seeks to make through its activities and the public benefit that is provided. Diversity House is established for the benefit of minority communities in Kent, in particular, but not excluding others. Some of Its aims are: • The relief of need by the provision of advice, assistance, information and ‘drop‐in’ services; • Advancing education and raising awareness in equality and diversity; • Promoting activities to foster understanding between people from diverse backgrounds; Diversity House in partnership with Professor Ted Cantle MBE (Institute of Community Cohesion) and I&DEA supported by Swale Borough Council, planned and delivered a one day conference in Swale. The conference which was aimed at bringing statutory organisations together with the third sector to explore key issues and take part in themed workshops. Diversity House identified some crucial topics for the day as follows: • How community cohesion agenda should be embedded in major policies in Swale and Kent • Raising awareness of the new Government led agenda – “building a big society” and how community cohesion can assist • Building resilience and promoting sustainable communities • Supporting partner organisations to have an understanding of community cohesion and its role in the current financial climate • Empowering elected leaders as community cohesion champions Delegates to the conference took part in community cohesion themed workshops as below: 4 | P a g e Community Cohesion in Swale and Kent 6th October 2010 Wyvern Hall – The Swallows Sittingbourne Kent CONFERENCE EVALUATION REPORT
  5. 5. • Community cohesion and regeneration • Tackling health inequalities through community cohesion • Relationship between education and community cohesion • Civil participation through improved community cohesion The following summarizes the main feedback from the conference. 1.1. Professor Cantle’s presentation – key points: • 80 languages are spoken in Swale schools and 200 in schools in Kent; • More migration with more diversity puts more pressure on resources; • A new identity challenge has arisen in the following ways - the way we think about our national identity; the way we think about our local identity and where we live; and the way we think about ourselves as individuals; all these determine how we relate and mix in our communities. The outcome could be a cohesive and a non cohesive community. • Mixed generations – people are living longer and this is reflected by the percentage of old and young people. Therefore, community cohesion should encompass intergenerational and cross generational programs. • People are living within their cultures and not mixing with local communities around them (that is, insular communities). What is the position of Swale? Is it a community ‘at ease with itself’? The key indicator would be – ‘people of different backgrounds get on well together’; (and others – sense of belonging, trust in local institutions, hate crime). To respond to the above question, Professor Cantle compared the Kent County to other areas of the country. For instance, % of ‘people who get on well with those of other backgrounds’ National average 76.4% • South East 78.9% • Kent 75.8% Neighbouring Counties • East Sussex 80.0 • Essex 79.9 • Surrey 80.2 5 | P a g e
  6. 6. • In Swale people have different ideas about cohesion. Cohesion is not just about race and faith – different divides; between generations; social class; travelers, rural v urban, gay community etc. There are issues with eeconomic migrants; between and within minority communities; community cohesion is no longer about ‘black v white’. In Swale just as in Kent, there are concerns about ‘pace of change’ and loss of traditions; conflicts over values, the ‘way we do things round here’; and ddisadvantaged groups who are poorly performing and becoming disaffected. In order to promote community cohesion it is pertinent that: • Community leaders are engaged; • Establish mixed communities rather than ghettos; • Educate; • Build bridges between groups • Promote community cohesion in schools, health, housing and the private sector There are some successful approaches to managing change, countering ignorance, relieving tension and preventing extremism across the country. Such community cohesion projects as ‘Living libraries’ and school linking are great ideas. Finally, one may need to ask is Swale an entity or Sittingbourne, Faversham and Sheppey? Communities like people can have multiple identities. Professor Cantle’s presentation is attached as an appendix to this report. 1.2. Workshops discussions – key points: Community cohesion and regeneration: The workshop participants generally acquiesced that there are various regeneration projects are taking place in Swale and the Rushenden and Gateway Project was mentioned by most. However, points to note are responses received on: “how can people feel involved in these projects”? Several suggestions were proffered such as: • Communities need to be brought in and involved in regeneration plans from the onset; • Regeneration projects should reflect the interest of young people to ensure that they stay and work in Swale; • Promote and communicate with people and between groups 6 | P a g e
  7. 7. Civic participation and community cohesion: Participants to this workshop raised pertinent questions such as: how can one measure local civic participation? There need to be a baseline in order to do this. It was generally agreed that the importance of local knowledge and sharing of information should be at the forefront of civic participation. Participants wanted to know the position of the place survey (is it still taking place?). Key points to note are: • How the media is accessed and used will impact either positively or negatively to democratic participation; • Participatory activities already happen in Swale. The Borough is blessed with a vibrant community sector – example cited is the important role of Diversity House. However, participants felt that there need to be concerted interaction between the community sector and elected members; • Local Engagement Forums – currently are seen not to have moved from area panels. Participants suggested that there should be a devolution and decentralization of power from the locally elected members to communities; • There are some things that are working well locally. For example, the provision of grants via LSP for community development; Kent Adult Social Services find engaging directly with very local groups the best approach for participation; community events such as the Big Lunch, Beachfield Play Day and other cultural activities and initiatives (celebration of culture, Swale Art Forums etc.) are good ways of promoting participatory activities. It was felt that there are some good engagement activities locally. Schools community engagement and volunteering projects were cited as working well in Swale. Sittingbourne Community College and the Isle of Sheppey Academy were highly commended for the work that they do within the community; Community Cohesion and Health Inequalities Delegates reflected upon what has been done in the past to promote community cohesion and thereby address health inequalities. Also aspects of these worked. Many projects and programmes have been initiated in health to promote community cohesion and tackle inequalities. For instance, Home Start’s project which supports parents in their own homes, this is carried out 7 | P a g e
  8. 8. by volunteers who attend an 8 weeks training so that they can work alongside families to support them any issues they may have with parenting. Swale Borough Council: Tailored work with homeless people to understand their holistic issues about why they have come to have housing issues and this includes understanding their experiences of ill health, often mental health. So that they can identify what issues led to this and what can be done to help people prevent becoming homeless again. Example: HELP – Housing Education and Learning Programme. Skillnet Group has worked with Maidstone and Tunbridgewells NHS Trust to support them to produce information in understandable and clear ways. Healthy Schools Programmes: these are felt to be highly beneficial because as well as the subject area being specific, the way in which programmes and projects are implemented and what is included, is more than just the health subject, it’s a lot about confidence raising, communities and feelings and emotions, which can help young people to confidently get involved more in making decisions for themselves and understanding the needs of others. The “House” project by KCC and the NHS in Kent was example given of where young people could access support, advice and health information in a setting which was different to them walking into or seeing a drop in service as associated with statutory body. It was suggested that it is imperative to support local communities who wants to see an increase in cohesion and development by giving them information on available services and pathways to these services amongst other issues. Community Cohesion and Education The workshop began with the introduction on duty to promote community cohesion in schools. Community from a school’s perspective was discussed and the meaning of the concept with respect to schools was noted to have a number of dimensions including: • The school community – children and young people, parents, carers and families, school staff and governors, community users of the school, facilities and services; • The community within which the school is located – the geographical community and the people who live or work in that area, etc. • The UK community 8 | P a g e
  9. 9. • The global community Community cohesion standards for schools framework have four key aims and these are: • Close the attainment achievement gap; • Develop common values of citizenship based on dialogue, mutual respect and acceptance of diversity; • Contribute to building good community relations and challenge all types of discrimination and inequality; • Remove the barriers to access, participation, progression, attainment and achievement Participants in the workshop reflected on how a school can contribute towards community cohesion that is through: • Teaching, learning and curriculum – helping children and young people to learn to understand others, to value diversity whilst also promoting shared values, awareness of human rights (e.g. Personal, Social and Health Education – PSHE, etc. • Equity and excellence – equal opportunities, removing barriers to access and participation in learning and wider activities and working to eliminate variations in outcomes for different groups • Engagement and extended services – to provide reasonable means for children, young people, their friends and families to interact with people from different backgrounds and build positive relations – e.g. school linking, links with communities, etc. 1.3. Conference evaluation • A total 57 people attended the conference 9 | P a g e
  10. 10. • Overall, delegates reported that they were very satisfied with the conference. The conference evaluation report is attached as an appendix to this document. 10 | P a g e
  11. 11. 2.0. What Would Promote Community Cohesion in Swale? 11 | P a g e Regeneration = involve communities (Rushenden & Gateway project); revitalise High streets (more appealing vibes and shops); promote brighter village environment; tourism T Good information = Less consultation, more listening; recognise the role of the media Build on the good practices of Sittingbourne community college & Sheppey Academy to encourage school community engagement in Swale Social inclusion = efforts to include groups that may feel disaffected e.g. Gypsy & Travellers, transient groups, LGBT, mental health, LDs , ethnic minority communities, etc. Promote cross generational and intergenerational activities/projects e.g. Bit 50 etc. Promote cultural mix= cultural strategy; identify & develop share identity(s) of Swale/heritage/history; highlight good points about Swale Co-production via partnerships & collaboration = public, VCS & private sectors; commissioning & delivery of services Acknowledge the vital role of community sector and reward them = Swale CVS, SCEN (all groups) = Big Society; volunteering Health & wellbeing: promote knowledge of local services; commitment to engagement; wider social determinants of health; flexible and enabling services Strong leadership and development =commitment of councillors to cohesion; training & engaging with groups; LEF to shift power to the public Community Cohesion
  12. 12. The above figure illustrates delegates’ views on factors which would promote community cohesion in Swale if addressed or implemented. In addition, interfaith work and involving young people were seen as very pertinent elements to ensure a cohesive community. 12 | P a g e
  13. 13. 3.0. Abdool Kara - Swale Borough Council Chief Executive Speech Community Cohesion Local Perspective – Key Points 3.1. Local Vision of Community Cohesion The Communities for Local Government department’s “Cohesion Delivery Framework” published in July 2008 states that an integrated community is based upon three key foundations: • People from different backgrounds having similar life opportunities; • People knowing their rights and responsibilities; • People trusting each other, and also their local institutions, to act fact fairly. They also give three key ways that a community should live together: • A shared vision for the future and sense of belonging; • A focus on what new and existing communities have in common, but also a recognition of the value of diversity; • Strong and positive relationships between people from different backgrounds. 3.2. Community Tensions • Community cohesion is at the heart of safe and strong communities • Events in recent years have shown that where there is a lack of cohesion, community tensions can result in serious disturbance with far-reaching social and economic consequences. 3.3. Swale Cohesion picture • We recognise that we must start from an understanding of our own context - based on many sources of information such as Place survey, Index of multiple deprivations, Migrant figures, Crime Statistics, Local performance indicators. 3.4. Key Challenge • The challenge in an authority like Swale is to ‘mainstream’ the community cohesion approach into the everyday business of the council, so that it is demonstrably integral to the strategic and operational intentions of the 13 | P a g e
  14. 14. authority - not as a separate strand of activity, divorced from the rest of our business. • In essence, it is not just what a small cadre of specialist officers do, but how community cohesion is seen as a corporate responsibility, with an appropriate allocation and sharing of workload between different directorates/departments. 3.5. Meeting the Challenge • So, our task becomes about demonstrating how the community cohesion approach is linked to and contributes to other strategies across the council. • Our own activity - Swale Borough Council run lots of programmes and projects which will clearly impact on the cohesion agenda, but there is a need to better demonstrate how these are linked into the vision and story of cohesion. • Also, where relevant, ensure that community cohesion actions and responsibilities are built into existing and newly negotiated contracts or partnership agreements entered into by the council with public or private sector partners for providing services and support in the community. • Also, where relevant, ensure that community cohesion actions and responsibilities are built into existing and newly negotiated service level agreements and/or contracts with third sector organisations that are funded by the council to provide services and support in the community. • And of course, ensure that the wide variety of activities being undertaken around community cohesion are recorded, shared and monitored as part of the overall approach. 3.6. Training and Development of Members and Officers • We have developed a medium to long-term training and development programme for members and officers, which incorporates and reflects equality, diversity and Community Cohesion issues, examples: - The statutory background to cohesion, diversity and equalities; - The vision for community cohesion; - Awareness of cultural diversity; - Being aware of local tensions and sensitivities, and what can serve to heighten or resolve community conflicts; - Relationship and alliance-building to challenge extremism and prejudice; and - Good practice and learning on cohesion matters from other councils. 14 | P a g e
  15. 15. 3.7. Examples of good local cohesion work in Swale • Idea Peer review • Bit 50 - Business Information Technology for the over 50s - Delivered by Sheppey Matters with the support of Swale Borough Council staff and the Community Cohesion Fund - NEETS and Students from Sheppey Academy at risk of exclusion trained over 50s in basic ICT skills on a 1-2-1 basis over a 12 week period - The course includes researching family trees with the older person sharing their live experiences. - The project has been nominated for a Phillip Lawrence Award which we hear about in October - The project will be nominated for an LGC award this coming week. - The external partners are now developing the project to create a sustainable future for the project and exciting new additions to it. - Gravesham are interested in taking on the model and rolling it out across their area. • Connecting Communities project - Priorities for the project were to hold a myth busting event and to encourage civic participation and resident involvement, developing a local model that could be transferred to other parts of the borough. - Local consultation has identified the main concerns as:  Immigration and the impacts on local employment  Anti Social Behaviour  Housing issues not being addressed fairly - As a result a fun, interactive community Myth Busting Event is being organised where residents can meet with frontline services, and practically participate in the development of a Sheerness cook book 15 | P a g e
  16. 16. 4.0. Workshops 4.1. Health Inequalities and Community Cohesion Facilitators: Vanessa Walker: Director of Practice: Institute of Community Cohesion Adam Lott: Equality and Diversity Manager: NHS Eastern & Coastal Kent Community Services Introduction: What do we mean? • Community Cohesion • Health, Equality and Diversity • Long term approach to doing well and improving Vanessa Walker Adam Lott “If community cohesion is the way to go……” What has been done before, which worked well? • Home Start: have a project which supports parents in their homes. This is carried out by volunteers who attend an 8 week training programme so that they can work alongside families to support them with any issues they may have with their parenting. This is hands on, in the home and the volunteers go out to them to support them. • Swale Borough Council: Tailored work with homeless people to understand their holistic issues about why they have come to have housing issues and this includes understanding their experiences of ill health, often mental health. This can the identified what issues lead to this and what can be done to help people prevent becoming homeless again. Example: HELP – Housing Education and Learning Programme. • Skillnet Group has worked with Maidstone and Tunbridgewells NHS Trust to support them to produce information in understandable and clear ways. • Healthy Schools Programmes: these are felt to be highly beneficial because as well as the subject area being specific, the way in which programmes and projects are implemented and what is included, is more than just the health subject, it’s a lot about confidence raising, communities and feelings and 16 | P a g e
  17. 17. emotions, which can help young people to confidently get involved more in making decisions for themselves and understanding the needs of others. • The “House” project by KCC and the NHS in Kent was example given of where young people could access support, advice and health information in a setting which was different to them walking into or seeing a drop in service as associated with statutory body. • Community Safety Partnerships are proactive and productive, but the NHS should be involved in them at a more senior level, bring for example, the police and health services closer together to understand and react to community cohesion and health. Front line NHS staff in some services work very closely with Police, but should be embedded further into the workings of organisations to really increase health and community cohesion. How can we support local communities who do want to see an increase in cohesion and development? • People need to be able to understand what services are available to them • Services and types of health services which people can access should be promoted to young people and children in education, so that they can navigate their way to necessary services as adults. Service structures will inevitably change, but they will know what kinds of services to ask about/for. This will enable communities to build their own education and capacity to become part of and involved in the wider many parts and services in their communities. • In education teach young people how to plan, manage and use practical skills which they would need to use in adult life, such as budgeting and prioritising money to spend on everyday living. This will increase confidence for later life to be able to make decisions about essential healthy everyday living. • Children’s centers: do people generally know what these are and what they are for? People should be able to see one or hear of one, know exactly what they do and then access them in an informed way, should they ever need to use it. Isolated communities or minority communities maybe less likely to use these services and less confident to walk in one day and ask about them, so less likely to feel part of their community. • What is the best way to communicate between services and communities/communities and services? • Majority of people will be involved in a child life in some shape or form, whether parent, carer, family member or through friendships. Providing information about services. • Statutory sector need to be able to spend more time with people and communities to explore their issues when accessing support, or being referred for support, so that individual’s wider health and health related issues can be explored. These may not be specific, but underlying issues or issues which relate to health inadvertently, will impact long term on how individuals are able to 17 | P a g e
  18. 18. engage in wider society. • There is a need to breakdown the stigma attached to seeking help. Some people have said they didn’t want to seem like they were ‘scrounging’ by seeking benefits. The word ‘benefits’ itself, has become a stigmatised term and people do not see them as something which they are allowed to have or owed. This could be the way in which press and media have portrayed the way in which the benefits systems operate and who uses them. Therefore more people than we know of may not be seeking this help and therefore these support systems should be communicated or marketed differently. • Stigmatisation of Social services: due to negative press and how they are portrayed on television programmes is that they intervene and take children away into care. We do not see enough positive stories celebrated and communicated about the wide variety of work that social services do to support all people. • Many people expressed that it was vital that organisations go out to the public and whatever the kind of work area, increase outreach. The best way to support communities is to go out to them and build trust. • Information needs to be communicated in the right way in the right place. It is felt that this is and has been hard to achieve but very important. Who is missed out and often not included? • Gypsy/travelers are a predominant community in Swale, but people still feel that more support should be promoted to this group to make them feel part of our wider community. This group is stigmatized by wider society and they therefore seem to live on the outside of what we know as community cohesion. • Aspirations of people and different communities need to be improved. We will have a diverse view on what aspirations are in different communities and with people within those communities but people should have equal opportunity to be able to improve and achieve their aspirations. • Sexual orientation: Lesbian, gay and bisexual people are often not embraced into communities and have become even more a minority group. • Organizations do a lot, that is a given, but there is a feeling in the wider community that people in organisations do not have enough understanding of certain needs of certain communities. This does not mean that people do not know or are unable to learn, just that communities do not feel that this is so. Their confidence levels in statutory services therefore are lower than it should be. Example given was the understanding about learning disabilities and involving people with disabilities. Champion your needs: If you had one wish each which you would like to be resolved in your local community, 18 | P a g e
  19. 19. what would that be? (this was where workshop members anonymously provided reply slips to this question) • I wish for better partnership working with health – particularly mental health • I wish there were no post code lotteries for essential services and support systems • I wish I could arrange a timely GP appointment • I wish that communication could be improved with the public on their level and their terms • I wish everyone could know where they can go for help event if this just a central agency for information e.g. The Gateways • I wish people could see their GP without having to make a pre arranged appointment and that all the community knew about it. • I wish there was secure funding to be able to talk to others and share information, skills and knowledge. • I wish that our communities had the confidence, knowledge and trust in both statutory and voluntary sectors to make informed decisions and enable sustainable communities, which happens by working together to provide access to holistic services for all • I wish that resources could be shared so that when funding for one project or post dries up there is the possibility of sustainability for some of the initiatives set up. • I wish that I could see more interest in volunteering • I wish that there were more successful outcomes from health and healthy living interventions in Kent. 19 | P a g e
  20. 20. 4.2. Regeneration Workshop. Facilitator: Emma Wiggins, Swale Borough Council. Morning Workshop: How can people feel involved in regeneration projects? Points raised regarding this: • Sheppey has a sense of place; they have a brand and need people to feel good about themselves. • Communities need to be brought in and involved in regeneration plans. • They need a skill set, involving the schools possibly. • Find out what is working well and use it to learn from and use personal experiences to promote a more powerful message. • Break down barriers and raise awareness. • Paid employment, ways to enter the world and how. • Minster, how do we get new people to explore the area. • Rushenden and Gateway Project and good example of regeneration and involving community. • No reasons for younger people to wish to stay and work in Swale. • Promote and communicate between groups. 20 | P a g e
  21. 21. • Need to promote a brighter village environment, more appealing vibes and shops. • Revitalise the High Street, Sittingbourne. Afternoon Workshop • Challenge for existing communities who have a real strong sense of community and how skill base and aspiration can help in putting in new schemes. • Thistle Hill is a new community but people are not staying there. • How to get temporary commuters to stay after work placements. • What is the identity of Swale, the heritage and history? • Perceptions, investments and services. • Schools are a key factor for people choosing to come to the area. • No sense of place, need to promote Milton Creek • Accessible conservation available to all members of the community. • Highlight good points about the area. • To provide a networking event to make firm commitments to make partnerships in collaborating and working together. • Opportunity for adults to participate in broadly based accessible learning. 21 | P a g e
  22. 22. 4.3. Civic Participation and Community Cohesion Facilitator: Kirsty Gaunt, Swale Borough Council Morning Workshop • Local measures – surveys, need to know the baseline. The importance of local knowledge and sharing information. What is happening with the place survey no longer taking place? How can partners and organisations have an input into local surveys? • Role of language is very important. Democratic Participation • Use of media • Access Local Examples of Participatory Activity • Important role of community sector – e.g. Diversity House • How can community sector engage with elected members? • Local Engagement Forums – formal meetings could be better. Have not moved on from area panels. There needs to be a power shift from members to public reps. Setting up in a circle could help. What works well locally? • Schools community engagement and volunteering projects with SCC and Sheppey Academy • LSP reward money funding community development work • Kent Adult Services find engaging directly with very local groups best approach • Community Events e.g. Big Lunch, Beachfield Play Day • Cultural and fun activities e.g. arts Wish list • Face to face contact is the most important success factor • Need to address stereotyping • Role of peer pressure and the media • Changing attitudes • Role models 22 | P a g e
  23. 23. • Finding time • Short term v long term • Give people a chance Afternoon Workshop Volunteering levels fairly stable. Adults with learning disabilities – there is support and structures in place now and they do feel listened too Young people – are more organised structures for engagement Public meetings Neighbourliness Empowerment – start at the very bottom Why do people not participate? What is hindering voluntary & civic activity? • CRB checks, Public liability, • Very bureaucratic • Don’t feel listened to • Being let down What is working well? Young people – understanding why they need to engage What isn’t working well? British Red Cross – struggle to recruit volunteer reps. Volunteers not keen to take on responsibilities, time pressures. Virtual Communities v committee meetings Wish list • A group that can be accessed by everyone • Safe haven • Better partnership working 23 | P a g e
  24. 24. • Less paperwork • Less consultation • Listen 24 | P a g e
  25. 25. 5.0. You Said and We Did Table You (Delegates)Said We (Agencies) Did Responsible When By? Better communication between agencies and groups Unified communication methods Shared communication directory and events calendar Simplified methods of communicating with communities and public Various communication methods and formats All agencies Inform and involve communities from the onset on regeneration plans Various methods of disseminating information and raising awareness of regeneration plan Local authority, Housing, and other developers Need to promote a brighter village environment, more appealing vibes and shops Local authority, private businesses Revitalise the High Street in Sittingbourne Initiate the ‘empty shops initiative’ Local authority, private businesses and land lords Highlight good points about Swale Branding and marketing of Swale, image reshaping, etc. Local authority, Media, communities Improve access to services Clear criteria for services made available; information on local services and pathways into services. Gateways. All agencies Better partnerships and collaboration Transparency, accountability, etc. All agencies Less consultation but listen All agencies Make volunteering Swale CVS and all 25 | P a g e
  26. 26. appealing and less cumbersome SCEN members Eliminate post code lotteries for essential services and support systems Health and Social Care Services Timely GP appointment; seeing GPs without having to make a pre arranged appointment and that all the community knew about it Health Services secure funding to be able to talk to others and share information, skills and knowledge Shared resources to ensure sustainability for some of the initiatives set up More interest in volunteering Proactive campaigning and raising awareness of the benefits of volunteering Swale CVS and other VCS groups More successful outcomes from health and healthy living interventions in Kent. Local authority public health, social services, GP Commissioning, private sector health bodies, etc. 26 | P a g e
  27. 27. 6.0 Conference Evaluation Results a) Numbers of conference delegates Conference Attendees Number of Attendee that completed evaluation sheets 57 25 b) Overall Satisfaction Very Satisfied Satisfied How satisfied were you with the registration process? 12 13 How satisfied were you with the conference materials provided? 12 13 Overall, how satisfied were you with the speakers / presenters? 9 16 c) Overall, how satisfied were you with the conference facilities? 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 How satisfied were you with the registration process? How satisfied were you with the conference materials provided? Overall, how satisfied were you with the speakers / presenters? Very Satisfied Satisfied 27 | P a g e
  28. 28. d) Sessions Attended Number of people that participate in this workshop (workshop 1 & 2) Tackling Health Inequalities through improved community cohesion 9 Community Cohesion and Regeneration 12 Relationships between Education and Community Cohesion. 10 Community Cohesion and Civic Participation 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tackling Health Inequalities through improved community cohesion Relationships between Education and Community Cohesion. People took part in this workshop. People took part in this workshop. e) Organisation, Staffing and Information. Strongly Agreed Agreed The content of conference sessions was appropriate and informative: 12 13 The conference was well organised: 10 15 Conference staff were helpful and courteous: 12 13 28 | P a g e
  29. 29. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 The content of conference sessions was appropriate and informative: The conference was well organised: Conference staff were helpful and courteous: Strongly Agreed Agreed f) Approximately how many conferences do you attend a year? people attended 1 / 2 per year people attended 3 /4 per year people attend 5 / 6 per year people attended more than 6 per year not answered 11 17 2 3 2 29 | P a g e
  30. 30. people attended 1 / 2 per year people attended 3 /4 per year people attend 5 / 6 per year people attended more than 6 per year not answered g) Rating of the Conference How would you rate this conference compared to other conferences of this type you have attended? average good excellent not answered 9 10 5 1 How would you rate this conference compared to other conferences of this type you have attended? average good excellent not answered 30 | P a g e
  31. 31. h) What kind of sessions would you like to see included at future conferences? · Specific focus on links between voluntary, public and private organisations. · A generation of action points from the workshops. · Follow up network meetings to make further partnerships. · Localised conferences rolled out across Kent. · More emphasis towards adult education. · Increased focus on disability . Examples of information sharing, good practice and diversity in communities. · Examples and people to show what works well. · How to put community cohesion practically into practice. · More information on what certain groups already do. · More Focus on younger people. i) What did you like most about the conference? · Overall contact was good with a wide range of speakers. · Ted Cantle (several times!). Well run and organised workshops. · Keynote Speakers. · Diversity of the group. · Knowledge and updates from the speakers and presenters. · Good links between speakers. · A sociable atmosphere. · Network opportunities and a greater understanding of Diversity House. 31 | P a g e
  32. 32. j) What did you least like about the conference? · Workshops needed to be longer and more focused. · Milk and juice in short supply at break time and lunchtime. · Did not require presentation on Swale CVS. · Use of Power Point during presentations. · Poor parking facilities and lack of directions to venue. · No biscuits! k) In which ways could this conference be improved? · Increased promotion of event to engage more people to attend. · Real life stories presented by members of the public. · Better refreshments and warmer room temperature. · Showing practical ways to put Community Cohesion into practice. · Biscuits in the break period. · More interactive and participation elements. · Providing lists with delegate details. · Providing copies of the various presentations. · More representation for community groups and more focus on workshops. · More volunteer agencies to be present. · Action plans for the local area and feedback given after 3 / 6 and 12 months. · The conference was ‘uplifting’, just needs more focus and work. 32 | P a g e
  33. 33. Appendix 1. List of Delegates Name Organisation Tick for Attended 1 Sue Whitehead Rethink √ 2 Helena Noifeld BBC South East √ 3 Donna Akhurst Swale Mediation √ 4 Lee Vallins British Red Cross √ 5 Paul Murray The Isle of Sheppey Academy √ 6 Efe Olokpa Community Service Volunteers √ 7 Jaime Giddings Mencap √ 8 Donald Grant Kent Police √ 9 Christine White Swale CVS √ 10 Mario Mureddu BBC Radio Kent √ 11 Bill Forrester Kent County Council √ 12 David Firth Kent County Council √ 13 Colin Thompson NHS Eastern and Coastal Kent √ 14 Allison Thomson Home-Start √ 15 Heather Thomas – Pugh BRFM Radio √ 16 Karen Taylor Kent Police √ 17 Tina Murphy Health Action √ 18 Felicity Adams Kent County Council √ 19 Lynda Longhurst Kent Adult Social Services √ 33 | P a g e
  34. 34. 20 Geoff Rutt The Sittingbourne Community College √ 21 Rebecca Walker Swale Borough Council √ 22 Kerry Newbury Swale Borough Council √ 23 Clare Hunt Kent Adult Social Services √ 24 Richard Gifford Kent County Council √ 25 Julie Nicholls BRFM Radio √ 26 Andrew Mcmillan Kent Adult Social Services √ 27 Sandie Hornby Swale Carers √ 28 Jane Brooke Mencap √ 29 Sharon Mcnaboe Sheppey Youth Action √ 30 Fola Ekeigwe DeRock Total Wellness √ 31 Tamar Beck Enterprising Opportunities √ 32 Cllr Roger Truelove Swale Borough Council √ 33 Lisa Whiteing Kent Police √ 34 Adam Lott NHS Eastern and Coastal Kent √ 35 Sarah Buckingham Kent Adult Social Services √ 36 Jacqueline Smith Kent Adult Social Services √ 37 Susannah Ireland Kent Adult Education √ 38 Jassy Purves Skillnet Group √ 39 Christine Locke NHS Eastern and Coastal Kent/Diversity House √ 40 Vandana Manocha Diversity House √ 41 Prudence Munetsi Diversity House √ 42 Debbie Kent Diversity House √ 43 Chris Bryant Swale Borough Council √ 44 Emma Wiggins Swale Borough Council √ 34 | P a g e
  35. 35. 45 Abdool Kara Swale Borough Council √ 46 Kirsty Gaunt Swale Borough Council √ 47 Sarah Williams Swale CVS √ 48 James Walker Swale CVS √ 49 Sue Mitchell Swale CVS √ 50 Professor Ted Cantle ICOCO √ 51 Vanessa Walker ICOCO √ 52 Pastor Tunde Jotham New Covenant Church √ 53 Puddy Bower Diversity House √ 54 Richard Bailey Murston Childrens Centre √ 55 Sue Brickland Murston Childrens Centre √ 56 Aaron Marshall Nacro Medway √ 57 Marika Sherwood Diversity House √ 35 | P a g e
  36. 36. Appendix 2. Community Cohesion and Education Swale Community Cohesion Conference Wednesday 6th October 2010-09-26 Community Cohesion and Education Facilitators: 1. Prof. Ted Cantle: iCoCo 2. Prudence Muntsei: Diversity House 10 mins Introduction: What is? • Community Cohesion • Community from a school’s perspective • Community cohesion standards for schools framework • Extended schools • Long term approach to doing well and improving Facilitators will display post cards with explanation of the above concepts on the groups’ tables to enable them with their discussion at the next phase of the session. Prof. Ted Cantle Prudence Muntsei 35 mins Is Community Cohesion the way forward...? Groups Work: split workshop attendees into groups to answer the following: • How does a school contribute towards community cohesion? 36 | P a g e
  37. 37. • What does a school need to consider in promoting community cohesion? • What are the key ways that can be used by local authorities in Kent to help build community cohesion through the education sector giving the low percentage of BME children in the county? • How can schools close the attainment and achievement gap that currently exists? • What are the practical steps that can be taking in creating cohesion within education in the future? • What training, Continuous Professional Development (CPD) and workforce development programmes for community cohesion would schools find useful to support their staff? Facilitators will stimulate and support discussion in each of the groups and ensure that everyone has their say and clarify anything about the session). 10 mins How will you drive forward your needs: • If you had one wish each which you would like to see resolved in your local community, what would that be? Facilitators to provide examples of what this could be (e.g. barriers to access, participation, progression, attainment and achievement; bullying, race issues and prejudice, inequality in staff recruitment, etc.) and give participants time to write 37 | P a g e
  38. 38. down. Participants will be encouraged to suggest anything which they feel would improve community cohesion in education where they live and that these are achievable This will be done individually and placed on feedback slips to encourage a response from every participant. As some may still not be confident to respond in group setting. Potential to feedback one or two at closing plenary. 5 mins Thank you and session ending: What’s next and what will happen with information? Actions for Facilitators: • Collate and write up information • Give a 5 minutes feedback to conference attendees • Handover the feedback sheet to be used for conference report later. 38 | P a g e
  39. 39. Appendix 2. Civic Participation through improved Community Cohesion Swale Community Cohesion Conference Wednesday 6th October 2010-09-26 Civic Participation through improved Community Cohesion Facilitators: Kirstie Gaunt: Community Development: Swale Borough Council 10 mins Introduction: What is? • Community Cohesion • Civic, Public, or democratic Participation • Diversity of participatory activities • Long term techniques to doing well and improving Facilitators will display post cards with explanation of the above concepts on the groups’ tables to enable them with their discussion at the next phase of the session. 35 mins Is Community Cohesion the way forward...? Groups Work: split workshop attendees into groups 39 | P a g e
  40. 40. to answer the following: • Is civic participation on the decline? If so, can community cohesion approach make a change? • What are the current approaches to participation used locally and are they working well? • Why do ‘Hard-to-Reach’ communities (e.g. BME, young people, disabled, etc.) not participate and how can we support them to do so? • How can the democratic leadership promote civic engagement and participation? Facilitators will stimulate and support discussion in each of the groups and ensure that everyone has their say and clarify anything about the session). 40 | P a g e
  41. 41. 10 mins How will you drive forward your needs: • If you had one wish each which you would like to see resolved in your local community, what would that be? Facilitators to provide examples of what this could be and give participants time to write down. Participants will be encouraged to suggest anything which they feel would improve civic participation where they live and that these are achievable This will be done individually and placed on feedback slips to encourage a response from every participant. As some may still not be confident to respond in group setting. Potential to feedback one or two at closing plenary. 5 mins Thank you and session ending: What’s next and what will happen with information? Actions for Facilitators: • Collate and write up information • Give a 5 minutes feedback to conference attendees • Handover the feedback sheet to be used for conference report later. 41 | P a g e
  42. 42. Appendix 3. Community Cohesion and Regeneration Swale Community Cohesion Conference Wednesday 6th October 2010-09-26 Community Cohesion and Regeneration Facilitators: Emma Wiggins: Swale Borough Council 10 mins Introduction: What is? • Community Cohesion • Regeneration, renewal, transformation • Sustainable local economic development • Long term techniques to doing well and improving Facilitators will display post cards with explanation of the above concepts on the groups’ tables to enable them with their discussion at the next phase of the session. Note: Facilitators to explain that attention is being paid to economic regeneration rather than a housing regeneration as the current economic downturn makes it pertinent to focus on the former. Emma Wiggins 35 mins Is Community Cohesion the way forward...? Groups Work: split workshop attendees into groups to answer the following: • What are the opportunities for enterprise development of both new and existing 42 | P a g e
  43. 43. businesses - what do we want to do? • How could goods and services be delivered differently – to keep money circulating locally, and reduce waste? • How can we mobilise resources to implement the empty shops initiatives to ensure that our high streets do not disappear? • How can we ensure that the provision of and promotion of support form part of the local strategy for economic regeneration? • How can we ensure that those living in disadvantaged neighbourhoods have influence over what happens in their local estate or area? • In many places, local energy and creativity become trapped, and different parts of the economy – local businesses, voluntary sector agencies, and the public sector – do not talk to each other. How do we prevent this from happening locally? Facilitators will stimulate and support discussion in each of the groups and ensure that everyone has their say and clarify anything about the session). 10 mins How will you drive forward your needs: • If you had one wish each which you would like to see resolved in your local community, what would that be? 43 | P a g e
  44. 44. Facilitators to provide examples of what this could be and give participants time to write down. Participants will be encouraged to suggest anything which they feel would improve sustainable economic development and regeneration where they live and that these are achievable This will be done individually and placed on feedback slips to encourage a response from every participant. As some may still not be confident to respond in group setting. Potential to feedback one or two at closing plenary. 5 mins Thank you and session ending: What’s next and what will happen with information? Actions for Facilitators: • Collate and write up information • Give a 5 minutes feedback to conference attendees • Handover the feedback sheet to be used for conference report later. 44 | P a g e
  45. 45. Appendix 4. Resumes a) Professor Ted Cantle CBE – Executive Chair iCoCo, Associate Director IDeA In August 2001, Ted Cantle was appointed by the Home Secretary to Chair the Community Cohesion Review Team and to lead the review the causes of the summer disturbances in a number of northern towns and cities. The Report – known as ‘the Cantle Report’ was produced in December 2001 and made around 70 recommendations. The concept of ‘community cohesion’ was subsequently adopted by the Government and Professor Cantle has overseen the development of this new framework for race and diversity at local and national levels. He is now Professor at the Institute of Community Cohesion (iCoCo), which is the UK’s leading authority on community cohesion. iCoCo is supported by four Midlands Universities and a range of other partners and develops and promotes good practice, provides guidance and conducts research and is sponsored by governmental and non-governmental departments and agencies. Ted is also Associate Director at IDeA. Ted has researched, written, commented upon and developed community cohesion in practical terms over the last 8 years. He is widely regarded as the’ founding father’ of community cohesion and is this country’s leading exponent and expert. He is also well known at an international level and has been invited to advise a number of governments and agencies around the world. 45 | P a g e
  46. 46. His book Community Cohesion: A New Framework for Race and Diversity, is considered to be the authoritative text on the subject However, most of his work is very practically focused and he is regularly engaged in advising local authorities and national agencies. He has overseen over 60 practical reviews and projects and developed a wide range of cohesion toolkits and assessed dozens of examples of good practice. He was awarded the CBE in 2004 for services to local government and community cohesion Mr. Cantle has extensive experience of two-tier government, the transition between the two and of unitary authorities. He was the Chief Executive of Nottingham City Council (which was two tiered for most of the time) between 1990 and 2001. He was Director of Housing in Leicester City Council (two tier) (1988 to 1990) and in Wakefield MDC (unitary) (1979 to 1983) and was Under Secretary at the AMA (1983 to 1988) and has also worked for Manchester City Council (unitary). He was a member of the Board of the Environment Agency for England and Wales (from 2000 to 2008) and Deputy Chairman (2005 to 2008). He was also Chairman of a NHS hospital Trust from 2001 to 2006 and has been a non- executive board member of two private companies and the East Midlands Development Agency. In all these roles he has had extensive experience of strategic development, and at a national, local and regional level. He has overseen strategic planning and transportation strategies, housing strategies, community strategies, environmental strategies and business development proposals. He has been a partner in many other planning proposals, including health strategies and voluntary sector and community development strategies. Mr. Cantle regularly speaks at conferences, seminars and workshops and to a wide variety of audiences, including tenants, elected members, ministers, professional groups and academics. These events cover the country and many international settings. In addition, Mr. Cantle has led community consultation programmes in Leicester, Wakefield, Manchester and Nottingham, with business, residents, BME and many other groups. 46 | P a g e
  47. 47. Mr. Cantle has had over 30 years in front line local government working with and in two tier, unitary, and metropolitan authorities. He has set up and developed a LSP and many other partnerships, including the Nottingham Green Group, the Leicester Environment City, the Youth Offending Team, the Strategic Partnership for Nottingham, The Nottinghamshire County Sports Partnership (of which he is still the Chair). He has worked with councils of all political persuasions and in all parts of the country and has worked closely with elected members throughout this time. He also set up and ran the Performance Support Team for the IDeA (2001 to 2003) to turn round ‘failing councils’ and this required the most sensitive of negotiations and the building of coalitions and consensus. More recently, he has worked with over 60 local authorities, at member and officer level, to advise them on all aspects of community cohesion, again on a country wide basis, with councils in all areas and all types. These have generally involved building a consensus across public, private and voluntary sector agencies. Mr. Cantle has led community engagement programmes in many areas across the country, focused on community cohesion, as part of the review process. This has included wide ranging public consultation and a series of focus groups representing all sections of the population and on the most sensitive of subjects to gypsies and travelers, rural isolation, gang violence, religious terrorism, and racism and sectarianism. Mr. Cantle has also had extensive experience of tenant and resident consultation, consultation with tenants (annually in Leicester and Wakefield and also on a local basis) the business community, planning and development proposal consultations and strategic development meetings. This has also included specific consultations with BME communities (twice yearly in Nottingham), women, older people (on an annual basis in Nottingham) and younger people. This also extends to local environmental issues for the Environment Agency (six times per year) and for each of the local councils in Wakefield, Leicester and Nottingham. Further, he has led patient consultation meetings for the NHS Trust in Nottingham on many occasions and in respect of sport for the County CSP. 47 | P a g e
  48. 48. b) Experience and Expertise: Consultant Resumes Vanessa J. Walker iCoCo Director of Practice Vanessa Walker is on long term secondment from the Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA) since September 2008. As Director of Practice Vanessa is responsible for developing community cohesion support: • Across local government • In public and cross sector partnerships • In Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnerships • With the NHS • To elected council members • Leading work to develop a national programme to be locally delivered for early years (pre-school) children and parents to respect difference • She is also responsible for developing relationships with central body organisations such as the Local Government Association, the Audit Commission and other related organisations such as the Centre for Intergenerational Practice and the Children’s Commissioner An example of a project covering the knowledge and skills required Vanessa successfully negotiated and secured a programme of community cohesion development with Hull City Council and its strategic partnership, ONE HULL. The anticipated outcomes of the programme are: 48 | P a g e
  49. 49. • For equalities and cohesion to be embedded as a mindset across all staff and members from the delivery partnerships – achieved through skills development • For equalities and cohesion initiatives to be mainstreamed – a thread running throughout all delivery activities enabled through committed leadership • For the Equalities and Cohesion Advisory Group to be considered by delivery partnerships as the main champions of equalities and cohesion and be seen as an approachable and professional vehicle to seek guidance and support – providing the intelligence glue to make mainstreaming stick • For delivery partnerships themselves to have identifiable equalities and cohesion champions consisting officers at all levels and elected members • To create a climate where shared learning and understanding is an organisational cultural norm • That statistics relating to ‘hate crime’ reduce and an improved score is achieved on national indicator one • Ultimately for people living in neighbourhoods in all areas of Hull to have similar life opportunities and enjoy positive relationships with people from different backgrounds This programme is due to be completed by April 2011. 49 | P a g e

×