Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T10:00:43.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Service Delivery at the Regional Level …

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2024

Ivan Beringer
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The aim of this Paper is to delineate a number of principles related to the effective delivery of welfare services at a ‘regional’ level. Regional level is used in this Paper in a general sense to distinguish ‘community’ based planning from planning at State or Federal level (or planning at an interpersonal, agency, specific field or societal level). No attempt is made to distinguish the precise characteristics of the regional level, but in detailed operationalised planning related to a specific area clear distinctions need to be made between the various planning levels and between the particular services being provided at each level.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , February 1976 , pp. 28 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

References

1. See for example The Localization of Health and Welfare Services: A submission to the Local Government Enquiry into Local Government Finance in Victoria V.C.O.S.S. 1971 and A Model for Welfare Service Planning and Delivery: Research Report by C. Benjamin and J. Morton of V.C.O.S.S. for Australian Government Commission of Inquiry into Poverty, Australian Government Publishing Service 1975.Google Scholar
2. Raysmith, H. Report on the Community Services of Geelong. Victorian Council of Social Service 1972.Google Scholar
3. See Kahn, A. J. Studies in Social Policy and Planning, New York, Russell Sage, 1969, p. 7–8.Google Scholar
4. See summary in Wharf, B, and Carter, N, Planning for the Social Services: Vol 5 in a Series of Case Studies in Social Planning by the Canadian Council on Social Development, 1972, p.8.Google Scholar
5. Kahn, A. J. Theory and Practice of Social Planning. New York Russell Sage Foundation, 1969, p 167.Google Scholar
6. Ibid p 166Google Scholar
7. Dahl, R. “The City in the Future of Democracy” American Political Science Review LXI December 1967 p 967.Google Scholar
8. Raysmith, H, Rimmer, J, and Wookey, D. The Geelong Experiment in Social Planning, Geelong Hilltop Press, 1973, p 59.Google Scholar
9. Wharf op cit p 65.Google Scholar
10. Rees, I. B. Government by Community. London, Knight 1971.Google Scholar
11. Sutton, A. J. Social Development Regions in the Sydney Metropolitan Area. Council of Social Service of N.S.W. 1974, p 6.Google Scholar
12. Report of the Committee on Local Authority and Allied Personal Services, Cmnd 3703, Seebohm Report, London: H.M.S.O. 1969.Google Scholar
13. Shaw, I.P. ‘Agency Decentralization: Planning and Assessment’ The British Journal of Social Work, Vol 3, N. 2, Summer 1973, p 229–241.Google Scholar
14. Ibid p 237Google Scholar
15. Ibid p 238Google Scholar
16. Ibid p 239Google Scholar
17. Ibid p 239Google Scholar
18. Deacon, B, and Cannon, C. ‘Social Priority Areas and Seebohm’ Social Work Today, Vol 1, No. 6.Google Scholar
19. As summarised in Shaw op. cit. p 239Google Scholar
20. Kahn, A. J. Social Policy and Social Services. New York Random House 1973, p 150.Google Scholar
21. See Winieche, L. ‘Self-determination of Need for Social Services among O.A.A. Recipients’ Welfare in Review July-August, 1971.Google Scholar
22. For further detail see Schorr, A. L. Social Security and Social Services in France. Washington D. C. Government Printing Office, 1965.Google Scholar
23. Gellhorn, K. Ombudsmen and Others. Cambridge Mass, Harvard Uni Press, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. As summarized in Kahn, Theory and Practice of Social Planning, op. cit. p 295.Google Scholar
25. See Poverty: The A.C.O.S.S. Evidence. Sydney, Star Printery 1974 p 29 and pp 55–57.Google Scholar
26. Rein, M. ‘Decentralization and Citizen Participation in Social Services’ Public Administrative Review, Vol XXXII Oct 1972.Google Scholar
27. See also Seldon, A. ‘Welfare by Choice’ in Lochead, A.V.S. (ed). A Reader in Social Administration. London Constable 1968, p 259–272 and the debate between Lees. D. S. and Casson. R, New Society, June 3 1965, pp 7-9 and June 10, pp 12-14.Google Scholar
28. The Making of Social Policy — Report prepared by A.C.O.S.S. for the XVI, International Conference of Social Welfare 1972. Sydney, A.C.O.S.S. 1972, p 9.Google Scholar
29. Kahn, . Social Policy and Social Services, op.cit p 172.Google Scholar
30. Kahn, . Theory and Practice of Social Planning, op.cit. p 287.Google Scholar
31. Ibid p 289Google Scholar
32. Ibid p 298Google Scholar
33. Kahn. Studies in Social Policy and Planning, op.cit. p 284.Google Scholar
34. For a detailed discussion on service integration in Australia see — Working Together: The Role of Client Citizen and the Community in the Planning Co-ordination and Regionalization of Social Welfare. State Social Welfare Conference 1973, Sponsored by the State Social Welfare Department and V.C.O.S.S. Melbourne. Published by V.C.O.S.S.Google Scholar
35. See O'Donnell, J. E. and Sullivan, M. M. Service Delivery and Social Action through the Neighbourhood Centre. A review of the Research in Jones, D., ‘Neighbourhood Service Centres’ Loewenberg, F. M. and Dolgaff, R. (ed) The Practice of Social Intervention: Roles Goals and Strategies: A Book of Readings in Social Work Practice. Itaxa Illinois, F. E. Peacock Publishers Inc, 1972.Google Scholar
36. Kahn, . Studies in Social Policy and Planning, op.cit. p 284-289 describes some of the different types of pragrammes manifest under the general banner of multi-purpose centres.Google Scholar
37. Loewenberg op.cit p 291.Google Scholar
38. Perlman, R. and Jones, D. Neighbourhood Service Centres, Office of Juvenile Delinquency Welfare Administration U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1967, p 82.Google Scholar
39. As summarised in Loewenberg. op.cit. p 291.Google Scholar
40. Seebohm Report. op.cit. Google Scholar
41. See O'Donnell, E. J., and Reid, O.M. ‘The Multiservice Neighbourhood Centre’ Welfare in Review, May-June 1971, p 1-8, and July-August 1971, p 8–18.Google Scholar
42. Seebohm Report, op.cit. and Kahn, J. J. Neighbourhood Information Service. Columbia 1967.Google Scholar
43. Kahn, . Social Policy and Social Services, op.cit. p 172.Google Scholar
44. Wharf op.cit. p 95.Google Scholar
45. Ibid p 94.Google Scholar
46. For further reference in this area see Kahn, , Social Policy and Social Services op.cit. p 155-57 and p 171-174 and Spencer, C. ‘Seebohm: Organizational Problems and Policy Proposals’ Social and Economic Administration, Vol 4, No. 4, October 1970 and Neill, J. H. Fruin, D, Matilda, E, Goldberg, and Warburton, R. W. ‘Reactions to Integration’ Social Work Today. Vol 4, No 15, Nov 1973.Google Scholar
47. Kahn, Studies in Social Policy and Planning, op.cit p 277.Google Scholar