鈥樷 is the second of three reports published by during the pandemic, and explores the models and frameworks used by local authorities and their community partners, to coordinate community support.
The report highlights the significance of hyper local, informal volunteering and good neighbourliness, as demonstrated by the rise of groups like Mutual Aid, something explored in the first report from the team,
Led by Dr Jon Burchell, the team is supported by 拢382,000 of funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) as part of the UK Research and Innovation鈥檚 rapid response to Covid-19, and has brought together experts from the universities of Hull, 葫芦影业, and Leeds.
Dr Burchell, from the University of 葫芦影业鈥檚 Management School, said: 鈥極ur second report identifies three main frameworks that were used to coordinate volunteer and community support. We identify the key foundations on which these models were developed, the distinctive types of models being utilised, and what lessons can be learned from these which might help shape post-Covid models of social action and community partnership.鈥
Co-investigator, Dr Erica Ballantyne, said: 鈥淚t鈥檚 remarkable what has been achieved under the common goal of creating a fast and effective response to meeting the needs of communities during the pandemic. These models have been underpinned by flatter, decentralised organisational structures with shared decision-making, greater collaboration and more subsidiarity. Importantly, moving away from departmental silo working has allowed the response to be more joined up and rooted in place. We鈥檝e seen the strength of voluntary and community sector organisations and the importance of pre-existing commitments to partnership working and co-production. Where trust and relationships had already been built, working together across sectors was more straightforward.鈥
Dr Harriet Thiery, researcher on the project, added: 鈥楾he report suggests that it is important to ask the question why, when faced with such a significant crisis, did these forms of place-based collaboration come to the fore as models for enabling effective community support? If these models were deemed to be the best option under such challenging circumstances, why have we been so reluctant to work in this way before? Our challenge now, is learning from what has worked well during the national lockdown and beyond, and understanding what is needed in order to harness and build upon these developments as we move forward, rather than simply retrenching into conventional ways of working.鈥
Summary of the findings:
- Rapid community responses to COVID-19 have been built upon growing relationships between Local Authorities and voluntary and community sector organisations.
- By building upon pre-existing levels of trust and collaboration, groups were able to coordinate a quick response and share roles and responsibilities.
- In most cases coordination of the community response was based around cross-sectoral response cells.
- These were often multi-agency collaborations with members coming from a broad range of organisations and departments, representing a transition from traditional silo working towards a place-based response.
- A key aspect was the ability of groups to work collaboratively, to be flexible in requirements and to be prepared to share information and resources.
- Local Authorities often recognised that they were not always best placed to provide support and ceded control and devolved responsibilities to voluntary and community organisations.
- National response strategies were criticised for failing to understand local needs and resources, and for being too slow due to excessive checks and procedures.
- Relationships with informal groups, like mutual aid, varied significantly across locations.