Transcript Slide 1

Symposium
June 8, 2007
Project Summary & Key Findings
Alison Caird & Eric Saunter
Steering Committee Co-Chairs
Background

How the project began



What the project wasn’t



No ‘magic bullets’
No media attention
What the project was



OCVI discussion
MCI proposal & funding
Learning from strategic partnerships
Building a growing consortium of organizations
dedicated to acting on what the sector wants
Project Challenges

Difficult to get the sector to talk about this
2
Work Plan Elements
Contracted objectives & deliverables
1.
Provincial ‘Unified Voice’ Mechanism:

2.
Working Differently to Work Better Models:

3.
To explore options and identify a preferred model to
support the development of a strong, inclusive
coordinating body for the non-profit, voluntary sector.
To identify effective approaches for working together to
address organizational and operational needs of sector
non-profits, including regionally based best practices.
Consult with the Sector:

To effectively dialogue with the non-profit, voluntary
sector about the value of a provincial coordinating body
mechanism offering a unified voice on common good
issues, and about regional or cross-sectoral collaborative
models and approaches.
3
Milestones
 Steering
committee & work groups established
 Sector Leaders Forum (Nov 06)
 Research & Environmental Scan Report (Dec 06)
 Sector Consultation (March to May ’07)



Regional Focus Groups - 5 sessions
(Kingston, Kitchener, Ottawa, Sault Ste. Marie, Thunder Bay)
Key Informant Interviews
On-line Sector Survey
 Symposium



VI (June 2007)
Education & dialogue on model approaches
Consensus-building agenda
Networking and collaborations
4
Environmental Scan &
Research Results
5
Environmental Scan and Research
Report analyzing current approaches prepared by the
Centre for Voluntary Sector Research and Development
(CVSRD) of Carlton University. Key findings include:




Reviewed 25 specific initiatives from North America and
United Kingdom
Identified a range of 7 component-model approaches
Scan found that associations that have a broad
membership to be the most prevalent form and also
appears to be the most sustainable.
The ‘pure’ coalition is most common form to address a
particular issue but is less sustainable.
6
Environmental Scan and Research
Report identified ‘Success Factors’ for a mechanism
including:







Sector led and independent
Reflecting all parts of the sector
Sticking to cross-sector issues
Establishing positive links with all levels of government
Having staff strength to enable strong organizational
and follow-through capacity
Demonstrating benefit/value to the sector
Listening, responding and building
7
Sector Consultation Results
8
Sector Consultation Strategy
Variety of communication vehicles employed

Broad questions posed:
1.What are your needs and wants?
2.Would a mechanism be useful?
3.What would a provincial mechanism look like?
 Structure Matrix Review (see hand-out)
1.
2.
3.
4.
Network
Alliance
Coalition
Confederation
9
Yes!
We want a mechanism!
Sector Leaders Forum: unanimous agreement
On-line Sector Survey: 88% said yes
Key Informant Interviews: 75% said yes
Regional Focus Groups: yes
10
"We need strategic planning at the provincial and national
level to ensure that the voluntary sector has the resources
necessary to improve. This strategic planning cannot be
done - at the level necessary - by individual
organizations. It needs research and planning.
It is not a goal - rather it is to be used for advocacy…on an
ongoing basis with government and major businesses and
associations.”
Key Informant Interview 2007
11
On-line Survey Results
12
How useful would it be for your organization to
have a cross-sectoral, provincial, coordinating
mechanism that would assist your organization
in each of the following areas?
Recognition of sector
67%
Expert advice
65%
30%
26%
Leadership, mentoring and training
53%
39%
Develop better policy and legislation
52%
43%
Networking among organizations
50%
0%
Very useful
20%
Useful
60%
9%
8%
42%
40%
3%
5%
8%
80%
100%
Not useful/a little useful
% Rating 5 Very Useful; 3-4 Useful; 1-2 Not useful/a little useful
13
How useful would it be for your organization to
have a cross-sectoral, provincial, coordinating
mechanism that would assist your organization
in each of the following areas?
Collaborative
purchasing
47%
Collaborative
marketing
47%
39%
14%
Recruitment/retention
of volunteers
47%
38%
15%
Collaborative staffing
26%
27%
0%
27%
48%
20%
40%
Very useful
25%
60%
Useful
80%
100%
Not useful/a little useful
% Rating 5 Very Useful; 3-4 Useful; 1-2 Not useful/a little useful
14
Please rate the priority that you think should be
given in the first year to each of the following
areas:
Recognition of sector
61%
Expert advice
37%
37%
2%
55%
8%
59%
7%
Better policy and legislation
34%
Networking among organizations
32%
58%
10%
Leadership, mentoring and training
32%
57%
11%
0%
Very high priority
20%
40%
60%
Moderate/high priority
80%
100%
Low priority
% Rating 5 Very high priority; 3-4 Moderate priority; 1-2 Low priority
15
Please rate the priority that you think should be
given in the first year to each of the following
areas:
Recruitment/retention
of volunteers
28%
Collaborative
purchasing
61%
24%
Collaborative
marketing
49%
18%
Collaborative staffing
27%
65%
10%
0%
11%
17%
58%
20%
Very high priority
40%
32%
60%
Moderate/high priority
80%
100%
Low priority
% Rating 5 Very high priority; 3-4 Moderate priority; 1-2 Low priority
16
Overall, do you agree or disagree that a
provincial coordinating mechanism is needed to
support organizations in the non-profit,
voluntary sector?
100%
80%
60%
50%
38%
40%
20%
5%
7%
Disagree
Neither
0%
0%
Strongly
disagree
Agree
Strongly agree
17
Which of these four approaches would be your
1st and 2nd choice as the most appropriate
type of mechanism:
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
35%
33%
29%
28%
17%
21%
17%
12%
0%
Confederation
Coalition
First Choice
Alliance
Network
Second Choice
18
Regional Focus Group
Results
19
Most pressing issues facing organizations:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Funding
Recruitment/Retention of volunteers
Increased training burden (due to ↑turnover)
Specially skilled volunteers (↑need)
Changing demographics (traditional sources more
difficult to access)
Recruitment funding (i.e. new money needed to recruit)
Required professionalization of administrators of
volunteers
Competing organizations
Communication and awareness
Northern Ontario issues (i.e. geographical, economical,
limited access to professionals)
20
What could a provincial wide, coordinating mechanism
do?





Identify needs and address/represent sector on common
issues
Share knowledge and organize regional meetings like the
focus groups to facilitate dialogue at the local level
Work with all levels of government to find solutions to
keep volunteer centres open
Be a representative voice, advocate on volunteer,
corporate funder, and public issues to government
Facilitate sharing of resources focused on education, best
practices, capacity building (funding)
21
“Confederation (model option) received the most discussion during
the focus groups and may be one of the favoured options to move
forward with the design of a provincial mechanism.”
Meeting Input Summary SVO
Participants comments offering the rationale for that selection:








Ability to access multi-way communications and decisions
from grass roots to the political level
Democratic and reflective of common issues in the sector
Open membership and opportunity for networking locally
The opportunity for all non-profits to be represented
Diversity of membership so that geographical, cultural and
ethnic issues can be addressed
Powerful voice because it would represent the whole sector
Defines a new level of commitment and accountability
Larger pool of ideas that can be refined to a common goal
22
Questions Generated by the Sector
During the Consultative Process
23
Questions generated by the sector include:




What benefit would there be for local
organizations?
Who will it serve, will it speak to the volunteer
sector and serve the needs of the volunteer
community?
How will the mechanism represent the urban and
rural communities?
Why do we have to create something that we
already have in Provincial Organizations?
24

How would a mechanism be different than
previous organizations like COVO/OCVI?

How would priorities be determined?

How would representation be determined?

Is this provincial body a group to strengthen
volunteerism in Ontario, or is it to build capacity
for the non-profit voluntary sector?
25
Where do we go from here?
26
Learnings to date

Strong desire in the sector to develop a crosssectoral and inclusive provincial mechanism

Mechanism will strengthen volunteerism at
regional and local level

Growing recognition that a mechanism will offer
value to the sector & civic society

Diversity and complexity of the sector presents
strength & challenges

While a mechanism is wanted, questions remain
about it will it look like
27
Next Steps?

Symposium VI: continuing to gather feedback from the
sector, and defining a preferred mechanism/approach

Purpose of the process

Refine and build

Commit to move it forward

If a Confederation/Coalition/other Model?

Define the Guiding Principles, and

How do we design it so it can serve the sector?
28
"If the Strengthening Voluntarism in Ontario project does
not result in the development of a provincial
mechanism, we believe that a lot will be lost: synergy,
momentum, a voice to government, sector recognition,
advocacy for the profession, growth, and an
opportunity to do something historic.”
Key Informant Interview 2007
29