Ontario jobLink Resource Centres - September 1996

Ontario jobLink Resource Centres

View Whole Report

• Introduction
• Project Description
• Evaluation Approach
• Key Findings
• Conclusion

This brief summarizes the findings from a formative evaluation of jobLink Community Resource Centres, a Strategic Initiative funded jointly by the governments of Canada and Ontario. The evaluation was managed by a Federal -Provincial Committee with representation from Human Resources Development Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services.

The Strategic Initiatives Program, announced in the Federal Budget of February 1994, is a five-year Federal-Provincial cost-shared program to test innovative ideas for delivery of social programs. Pilots considered for funding include those that are designed to test new options for reform in training, income security and social services, and learning; to explore ways to help people move from welfare to work; and to find more cost-effective approaches to labour market programs.

The jobLink project was launched under an agreement between the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Social Services. Established in 1994/95, funding for the $ $0 million initiative was equally shared between federal and provincial governments. The goal of jobLink was to improve and co-ordinate existing labour market services for people on social assistance. An important component involved the establishment of 11 community Resource Centres (RCs) across Ontario.

The RCs were put in place to test the feasibility of coordinating the delivery of programs and services for social assistance recipients provided by the federal, provincial, municipal governments and by community organizations. They were developed as multi-service centres that provided information about training, education, and employment opportunities in local communities. The RCs were not to duplicate existing services but rather enhance, coordinate and streamline service delivery. The "prototype" Resource Centre below depicts the information and support provided to social assistance recipients:

• Orientation, intake and initial planning
• Individualized assessment, self-help tests and employment planning
• Information from resource library, self-help tools
• Training for employment
• Self-employment opportunities.

Initially identified through a local planning process, the approach followed in the resource centres was based on community needs. The initial sites were established in different areas of the province to allow for different modes of delivery. The community level planning and consultation was seen to be key in developing implementation plans to organize and modify supports, services and programs in the community.

The formative evaluation, completed in the Fall of 1996, reviewed the first nine months of operations at RCs in two of the eleven communities - Windsor and the Sudbury Area. Six points of service were reviewed, representing a mix of urban and rural services.

Issues examined in this evaluation phase related to administrative, operating and service arrangements, partnership and consultation and preliminary objectives-based outcomes. Information sources included: a review of the documents, on-site visits and key informant interviews with stakeholders.

Following the Strategic Initiatives evaluation approach, a more results-based summative evaluation phase will follow, to be completed in the summer of 1997.

Partnership Arrangement

In keeping with the community-based nature of the RCs, operating partnerships varied across RCs. A common element to all RC operating structures was the partnering of the municipality, MCSS and HRCC.

The partners provided the RCs with a range of supports: municipalities: counselling services, funding and staff; MCSS: funding, equipment, technology, and access to programs; HRDC: funding, technology, information, staff and access to programs.

Beyond the three principle partners, arrangements were made with other community agencies. In two small communities, the agencies acted as the RC accountability centre. Overall, it was found that roles and responsibilities of partners were clear and understood.

The extent of community level planning prior to start-up varied between sites, limited by short time frames. Ongoing community consultation was also varied across the RCs examimed. For RCs that maintained community advisory communities, there seemed to be a greater community ownership and acceptance of the RC as a community service organization.

Services Delivery Integration

In implementing the six RCs surveyed, integration was achieved with municipal and HRDC services, but to a much lesser degree with broader community agencies. All RCs examined had varying degrees of staff co-location between municipal, HRCC, and agencies. Espanola was the only fully co-located RC, integrated with the Espanola HRCC. It was felt that the tight time frame required for the design and planning of the RC was a factor that limited co-location with the RCs. While agencies were consulted early in the process, they were not consulted again until the plan was developed and it was too late to make changes.

The RCs made a contribution by coordinating community services and increasing client access. Service contracts with community agencies aided access through referral to other services. In many cases however, these services were provided off-site, requiring the client to commute to another location.

The RCs experience with co-location highlighted the benefits gained for co- located staff through the "knowledge transfer" from exposure to partners' programs and client approaches. It was felt this situation increased both the timeliness and accuracy of services and information provided clients.

Lessons Learned - Partnerships

An area of interest in undertaking the formative evaluation was identifying lessons learned for future partnership. For the research to-date, several general observations can be made:

• There must be time allocated for planning.Community planning was a component of the jobLink project. While planning was undertaken in all RCs, some RCs found that there was insufficient time, resulting in only partial consultation, limited identification of existing community services and gaps, coordination difficulties in equipping RCs and orientating staff.

• Community involvement in the development and implementation process is both important and demanding. While consultation helps build community ownership and identify gaps and service priorities, care must be taken in the process. In public consultations, the process be managed carefully to avoid resentment between agencies and maintain ongoing community participation

• Co-location requires building staff awareness. As co-location of a number of service providers brings together staff from different organizations, significant attention should be paid toward familiarizing and orienting staff to each other's organizational culture, objectives, and procedures.

The formative evaluation of six of sixteen Resource Centres established under jobLink indicates that the activities and services implemented met the majority of the jobLink objectives. Despite difficulties that limited implementation, the majority of RCs examined appear to have been successful in meeting their clients needs to the extent they could. While the evaluation identified issues that require addressing to improve RC operations, accounts from the majority of key informants consulted report that the RCs have provided a valuable resource to the community.

Although the formal jobLink project lasted one year, the formation of the RCs provide important lessons for the establishment of subsequent partnerships. Moreover, the jobLink Resource Centres are evolving in response to changes in program and service delivery at the community level.