Agenda item

For the Community Anchor in Hungerford to share with the Board their progress regarding the community conversations which have been held.

This item will also include an update from the Building Communities Together Partnership on progress against the Board's strategic focus to 'increase the number of communities where community conversations have successfully run and local action plans have been jointly developed'.

The Board considered a report and presentation (Agenda Item 8) regarding an update on community conversations.

Suzanne Taylor, the community anchor in Hungerford, provided an overview of the story and outcomes of the multi-professional lens, a group of professionals and parents which had built networks and relationships and brought about changes in their community as a result. There was a broad membership of approximately 30 members from a range of organisations with average attendance at a meeting being 15 people. Suzanne explained that her role was to facilitate the meetings to ensure they made progress and had focus.

In her capacity as the Headteacher of Hungerford Nursery and Family Wellbeing Hub, she saw the role of the group as providing a bridge between the community and professional agencies to enable access to other services and build on strengths. She highlighted the need for effective communication to have a response and not just information sharing in order to stop silo working.

The meetings used the Scanning, Analyse, Response, Action (SARA) model used by the police which gathered information, considered existing solutions, other potential solutions and shared actions. A communal language was developing and the members of the group had been reflecting on the language they had been using with the community, particularly around mental health.

The outcomes for professionals had been that new connections were established and there was concise information sharing in a non-judgemental forum. The Education Welfare Officer had questioned why there were not similar models of working in other areas and professionals had begun to shadow each other to gain a better understanding of their roles. For organisations there had been the outcome to introduce new ways of working and building capacity, for example it had been identified that fire fighters could operate as SAFE workers in schools. The community outcomes had been better integrated services which worked consistently and built trust. The SAFE programme was now running a pilot in feeder schools of John O’Gaunt, Theale Green and Trinity for Years 5/6.

Shelly Hambrecht, Co-ordinator Family Centre Hungerford, discussed the role of the family centre, outlining that the domestic abuse theme had begun to be discussed in March 2017 and had inspired women who had experienced domestic abuse to become involved in Peer Volunteering. A natural pathway had emerged to support people move from support for low mood, to parenting support, to getting to a position where they could support other families.

Suzanne Taylor concluded the presentation with some quotes from group members which demonstrated the impact of their work.

Councillor Fredrickson enquired how the balance between focussing the conversations but not leading them was struck. Suzanne Taylor advised that the group had chosen the themes and the SARA model was a useful way to enable the conversation to develop.

Councillor Fredrickson noted that he had attended the Thatcham community conversation the previous evening and noted the absences of young people. He enquired whether attracting a wide range of people had been a problem in Hungerford. Suzanne Taylor responded that different groups engaged at different points for different purposes and they were attracted if the theme being discussed was of interest.

Garry Poulson thanked Susanne and Shelly for their clear presentation and raised a query regarding whether the term ‘community conversations’ might run the risk of making anyone not involved feeling excluded. Suzanne Taylor explained that her group understood how their community worked. She advised that communities rose to a challenge when they needed to, for example when there was flooding. Their work created ripples, rather than waves.

Councillor Lynne Doherty noted that Suzanne’s leadership had contributed to the success of the group and raised her experience of the Newbury community conversation. It was not attended by any professionals and began by raising issues such as litter and developed to discussing social isolation. She asked what an appropriate balance of professionals to residents would be. Suzanne Taylor advised that it would depend on the focus and the principal aim had to be community empowerment. She advised that matters such as litter had emerged when the process began two years ago and had evolved with what had worked and what had kept momentum.

Councillor Doherty enquired whether there might be scope for the family hub to stretch the age range they worked with to include elderly people. Suzanne Taylor reported that the community officer from Sovereign would be attending a future meeting due to their interest in older peoples’ mental health.

Rachael Wardell noted that it might be a challenge for the Health and Wellbeing Board, considering its governance and focus on programme management, to support and enable a way of working which was less predictable. The work in Hungerford developed in a way that could not have been anticipated and different things would emerge in different areas. It had been really helpful to have a description of the success in Hungerford because a performance statistic on the dashboard would not encapsulate the impact that had been achieved.

Councillor Mollie Lock noted that facilitators needed to hold on to attendees like balloons and know when to draw them in and when to let them drift away for a time. She also noted that many groups operating on any number of names could be considered to be community conversations. Suzanne Taylor agreed that the name of the group was not important so long as they discussed things which interested people.

Luke Bingham enquired how such groups could be supported to be self-sustaining. Suzanne Taylor suggested that her group was self-sustaining in that the facilitator role could move around but the groups should not be afraid of changing. Luke Bingham further asked whether the group made use of social media to promote the meetings. Suzanne Taylor advised that the group had worked because it did not make demands upon people’s time and had evolved into a format that worked for everyone.

Susan Powell gave a presentation to summarise the progress of community conversations being undertaken elsewhere in the District. She stated that she was encouraged by the acknowledgement that the work was flexible and highlighted that action plans which emerged from community conversations would also be flexible.

Community conversations were building momentum. A meeting had been held in Burghfield following a large number of anti-social behaviour complaints. A significant number of new Neighbourhood Watch schemes had been set up across the District after the Hungerford event and in Aldermaston and interesting conversation had emerged with anti-social behaviour initiated discussions but the community revealing that they were concerned about social isolation. A meeting had also been held in Thatcham on 27 September 2017 and was attended by around 40 people.

Councillor James Fredrickson noted that he had attended the meeting in Thatcham and was sceptical that there would be many people due to poor weather conditions but he was pleasantly surprised to see the meeting well attended. The conversation naturally evolved and identified small things which had a big impact on the community. He noted that many residents were concerned about anti-social behaviour by young people on the Broadway but there were no young people present to discuss. There was a clear appetite in the room to address the issues that were identified and he left with the view that there was a vibrant community in Thatcham.

Susan Powell advised that a Youth Council meeting would be held that evening with attendees to be asked what they would like to create. The profile of the Building Communities Together Partnership was being raised with a refresh of the website and template posters. Existing community forums were being mapped so duplication could be avoided.

(Councillor Graham Jones joined the meeting at 10.35am)

Councillor Fredrickson expressed the view that externally it was right that ‘community conversations’ should be a flexible term and asked whether internally they needed to be thought of in a different way. Susan Powell advised that ‘engagement’ did not quite describe what a community conversation was and supported the view that a community should self-define their name and ambition.

Councillor Lock noted that there had been a successful forum in Thatcham North which had created a playground in Dunston Park. She noted that the group had served its purpose then ebbed away. Susan Powell agreed with an organic approach where conversations ended when there was no longer that shared purpose.

Andrew Sharp noted that conversations lead by different agencies might have different content and results. Susan Powell agreed that if there was a different seed there would be a different flower.

Councillor Fredrickson concluded that brilliant progress had been achieved and was encouraged to hear how the conversation in Hungerford had matured. Flexibility had enabled tangible, if not measurable, results that would give momentum to conversations in other areas.

RESOLVED that the update report and presentations be noted.