The Community Hub Process March 24, 2015
More About the Facility 58,000 sq feet building Designated space for partners Shared group space opportunities: meeting room, community kitchen and gym space Shared office space first and second floor Living Wall 2 types of green roofs Walking track Gymnasium Lots of natural light 7 group rooms of various sizes 21 community partners colocated Work with local artists
Chronology of the Hub Functional plan for MOHLTC in 2004 Langs purchased 3.2 acres of land in 2007 Lyle S. Hallman Foundation (local family foundation) contributes funds for partnership development staff in a 2 year project (2008-2010) Application to FEDDEV approved June 2010 to build new facility ($4.9 million) City of Cambridge invests to co-locate seniors programs ($ 3 million) Groundbreaking occurred in October 2010 Langs moved into the new facility in September 2011
Partnership Planning Process Developed an expression of interest form to gather same information from partners 2 consultation sessions for community partners with 20+ attendees 60 organizations inquire about space in the new facility 24 Expressions of Interest submitted 1-2 new inquires each month during the first few years of operation Average of 3-6 inquires a year now
Structure of the Partnership Partnership agreement Lease Menu of options associated with leasing space Means to resolve conflict
What A Partner Receives Partners lease between 1 to 5 offices $ 12 square foot $ 10 square foot for common fees $ 7 square foot for shared business expense Parking (advance warning offsite) Tenant invoiced for photocopying Use of a 1 free meeting room monthly Book other meetings rooms at very affordable not for profit rate Shared photocopy room, staff rooms or kitchenettes Some cupboard storage Use of the walking track for agency staff in-kind Security system
What Tools We Put In Place 1 Leadership Team Member and 1 Support Staff work with partners as a function of their jobs Lunch and Learns Partnership evaluation tool Partnership Newsletter Opportunities for joint programs and events (e.g. volunteer appreciation)
Partner Benefits Affordable space Beautiful facility Little responsibility for overhead Shared reception services Better service for their clients Interaction with a variety of colleagues Increased visibility/identity being part of the hub
Community Engagement Community Services Committee, a standing committee of the Board adapted decision making tool Evaluate readiness /ability to partner Evaluate Fit at strategic and front line levels Set up a subcommittee to review expressions of interest from new partner organizations 4 sessions where partners appeared as a delegation to the community - grouped by population (e.g. youth orgs) 1 plenary session of all to make recommendations Used Six Thinking Caps Methodology
Sub-Committee and Recommendation Meeting Membership (cont d) 30 community representatives 7 Community and Funder representatives 3 Representative from local schools 1 Waterloo Region Police Services 2 Church/Faith representative 2 Seniors Centre/City of Cambridge representatives Result: average of 15 representatives at each meeting
Six Thinking Hats Edward de Bono There are six metaphorical hats and each defines a certain type of thinking. When done in a group, everybody should wear the same hat at the same time. The principle behind the Six Thinking Hats is parallel thinking which ensures that all the people meeting are focused on and thinking about the same subject at the same time.
Six Thinking Hats Edward de Bono BLUE Hat What are the six hats? WHITE Hat Information & Data Neutral & Objective Checked & Believed Facts Managing the Thinking Setting the Focus Making the Summaries BLACK Hat Why it may not work Cautions Logical reasons must be given YELLOW Hat Why it may work Values & Beliefs Known & Potential Benefits The good in it Logical reasons must be given Partnership GREEN Hat Creative Thinking Possibilities Recommendations How could this partnership work at Langs? RED Hat Feelings & Intuition Emotions / Hunches "At this point no need for explanations
Recommendations Process Role of sub-committee review Expressions of Interest; have presentations by Community Partners and make recommendations Role of Community Services Committee recommendations Board Approval February May 2011
What Worked with Partners Partnership agreement Orientation for community partners including bus tour of the neighbourhood Strategies to maintain day-to-day contact Partners newsletter Centralize contacts/communication for partners Lunch and Learns Involvement in special events meet and greets Commitment to 5 year lease
What Didn t Work with Partners Time consuming Logistics of set up (e.g. phone and IT) Leases and details, details, details Standardizing furniture was problematic with a few partners Patience of partners during the process varied
Next Steps Partnership Development Grant to examine further integration opportunities that includes: Partnership planning sessions Communications strategies Increased opportunities to co-facilitate programs Joint professional development Joint special events Closer look at back office supports Integration of volunteer opportunities Joint evaluation opportunities Influencing the development of Hubs at a provincial level
QUESTIONS?