Promising Practice Profiles

Breaking Cycles by Building Neighbourhood Hubs

The full Promising Practice Profile is available for download in PDF format (710 KB)

Project practice

The Breaking Cycles by Building Neighbourhood Hubs project aims to develop community hubs where children's services work together to achieve better outcomes for young children and their families in Hume. The project targets families with young children (0-5 years old) - especially those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.

Project undertaken by

Brotherhood of St Laurence

Start date

July 2006

Focal areas

Family and children's services working effectively as a team

Supporting families and parents

Early learning and care

Healthy young families

Child friendly communities

Program

Communities for Children (CfC)

Issue

The Broadmeadows area within the city of Hume (in the outer north-west area of metropolitan Melbourne) is historically one of high levels of disadvantage and poverty. In the Early Years context, this is often reflected in limited access to early childhood education programs including Kindergartens and affordable childcare services.

It is now widely acknowledged that children's development is a foundation for community development and economic development, while children's access to universal services is crucial to a solid foundation for the developing individual. However, there is inequality in children's participation in universal services. For vulnerable families, participation is inhibited by practical and structural barriers. The Breaking Cycles by Building Neighbourhood Hubs project seeks to tackle this systemic problem with a systemic solution, by developing systems and settings that provide access to early childhood services for all. This means a fundamental change in the culture of service delivery from singular to integrated.

Hubs represent a paradigm shift in the planning and practice of service provision. Thus, fundamental to this project's aim is engaging the key service providers - schools, kindergartens, maternal and child health, and other relevant agencies - to work collaboratively. The project calls on services and their staff to reflect on and rethink practice, and to align new strategies within an inclusive practices framework. In short, the project aims to achieve an integrated approach to child and family service provision. It also increases access to programs in the simplest possible way - by locating them within easy distance for parents with young children. Easy physical access reduces isolation for families with a number of young children. This is a holistic approach, encouraging service collaboration that makes interventions meaningful and effective.

Program context

The Hume hubs demonstrate a range of models. Early Years Hubs are defined around local needs. Hubs can be a single location or a network of places working together to offer programs, services and events to families and children. In Hume, there are five hub projects operating across seven sites - and they are diverse in delivery and approach. The sites are located in primary schools or in central neighbourhood venues. The key sites and their current services are:

Campbellfield: primary school and preschool, playgroup, language and literacy enrichment program.

Jacana: primary school and facilitated playgroup.

Broadmeadows: Meadowbank Primary School and Early Learning Centre and community outreach to families.

Broadmeadows: Meadow Fair North Primary School and Preschool, 3-year-old activity group and Maternal and Child Health Service.

Broadmeadows: Lahinch Street Maternal Child Health Service, playgroups, outreach service, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) project.

Meadow Heights: VisyCare, Playgroups, Occasional Care, adult education and MCH, Parent-Child Mother Goose program.

As collaboration among the health, education and community sectors, and between universal and secondary agencies increases at each site, so too does the number of new activities. It is promising that most agencies in the Early Years Partnership (Anglicare, VASS, and the Smith Family, for example) have chosen to locate activities and share resources at neighbourhood hubs sites, recognising that doing so enhances outcomes for young children and their families.

Practice description

How do the hubs work?

The hubs work by facilitating the connections between the key services and professionals offering support to children and their families in a local neighbourhood. The collaboration aims to establish lasting relationships between families and the services they use throughout the course of their child's early years. The hubs sought to build on the existing relationships and establish additional strong links.

The Hub Strategy Group identifies the key activities, ways of working, and ingredients of the hub sites. The group uses a "cog" metaphor to extend the hub concept. While "hub" clearly illustrates the role of the sites, "cog" describes how they connect and link with other services. The hub turns, moving the cogs that are linked to other cogs, and this creates complementary movements. The hub is representative of core service or the site, the cogs represent the links and networks that are created through collaboration, and the motion represents the unified movement with others that occurs in integrated practice: the synergy. It is at the moment of interlocking that the outcomes for communities are positive.

The key components of a hub are as follows:

Information and content

Hubs are places where families of a local community/neighbourhood get information about services and support. They are family focused and identified as places where children are central. The Information exchange is both formal and informal, and the information content changes to reflect the needs of the families in the community. There are often pathways for employment, education and training services both formal and Informal for families.

Practice

Hubs are first and foremost places that practice the art of respectful welcome. They demonstrate the capacity of the community "institution" to be a mechanism of social inclusion. The hubs are unapologetic about their child focus and seek to connect families with opportunities both inside and outside the hub itself. By their nature they are multi-functional and will endeavour to meet the needs of those whom they know and those who just "rock up".

Place focus

Hubs are local community meeting places; a family place with space available for participation and education (English Language classes and meeting with the Office of Housing). They are mostly located within walking distance for local families and their location is easily identified. The hubs are in logical neighbourhood locations; services are either co-located in the same building or can be seen from the hub location. They are ideally near public transport allowing for participation in the community beyond the hub. Workers and volunteers know their community well and act as an advocate for its citizens, bringing resources and facilities within easy reach.

Concept

The concept is grounded in social inclusion and the underlying principles of community development. Hubs are about building positive connection between children, the family, neighbours, the neighbourhood, cultural communities and the whole community. They are about nourishing, welcoming and respecting community members to achieve positive outcomes. They embrace diversity and work hard to create a sense of belonging for all.

Components of a hub

The following diagram details some of the elements at work within each component while illustrating the connectedness between them.

Breaking Cycles Components of a Hub Diagram

 

Key ingredients:

There are a number of key ingredients that underpin the components of the hubs project. These are discussed below:

Partnership development

Communities for Children provided an opportunity to develop projects within the network of the Hume Early Years Partnership (HEYP). The project collaborated and constantly informed discussions about change at the local level. HEYP provides opportunities to refine service delivery and change from a competitive philosophy to one of mutual support and encouragement. The role of HEYP has enabled key players to come together to:

Communication processes

Communication has been - and remains - very important at all levels, from senior executives to community workers. Informal and formal processes for communication have been used to promote a two-way exchange of ideas.

Communication strategies have included:

Planning & set up

The planning stage of the project required sufficient time to develop connections, respect and understand each other's cultures and commit to an agreed new way of working together. At each site, the project:


Resources

Collaborative partnerships enabled cost-effective management of shared resources and personnel. Community resources were accessible in joint initiatives. Peer support and skill sharing were encouraged. For example, during the National Playgroup Day celebration, all community liaison and hub workers worked in partnership and shared resources to run a free activity program for parents and children. This event was held at the local shopping centre and attracted more than 250 parents and children.

Community liaison role

It is well understood that staff make a significant difference in the quality of the programs delivered. The project employed local community development workers, one who spoke Arabic. The personal attributes of the workers involved had an immense positive impact within organisations. Access to high quality bilingual facilitators is key to providing a good program those parents and children want to attend. The role of the project worker in each site was critical and is detailed below.

Role of the Project Worker

Leadership. Project workers lead services in and around the local sites into effective collaborations. The project workers introduce families to the hub. They network with appropriate services in order to develop (formal and informal) ways in which services might work together to engage children and their families.

Networking. Workers establish regular local network meetings and build relationships with local service providers. These meetings began as local committees guiding hub activities and have developed into formalised network meetings. The networks are (in the last stage of the project) led and organised locally with support from the project staff.

Relationships. Building and maintaining relationships with schools and other service providers is another key task for project workers. Success in relationships involves time and effort and has been achieved by specific strategies of building respect, trust and recognition of personal needs. By engaging individuals in areas of mutual interest we provided insights and developed a mutual code of conduct and opportunities to redirect disruptive behaviour.

Joint activities. Workers are responsible for fostering joint planning and resource sharing at a service delivery level. For example, include Prep teachers and Kindergarten teachers planned a joint Children's week activity at each of the three school sites.

Implementing inclusive and social engagement strategies. Workers implement strategies such as a phone call or a personal contact to engage families. Another strategy is to establish free activities/events to enable low-income families to attend, such as playgroups, family fun days, enrolments for preschool information sessions, transition to school programs, bilingual storytimes, early literacy events, and morning teas.

Identify barriers to participation. Workers are respectful of the community, and ensure that places inviting to all. They consider questions such as: Is the site accessible? Does it have the right tools? Does the community have ownership of the area? Are there footpaths, milk bars? What are the physical barriers? There are many things that limit a community's involvement in programs including distance and geography. Emotional and cultural barriers exist that can prohibit access and encourage social isolation. Awareness of these restrictions can lead to creative solutions and develop sustainable links for families and the effective operation of hubs. For example, project workers make sure things are within walking distance and pram accessible (e.g., building access; major roads/highways creating a barrier, etc).

Focus activities on vulnerable children's early years. Project workers maintain a strong focus on the type of activities developed and offered in the local hub sites. The initiatives are always oriented to the early years and particularly reaching the most vulnerable children and their families.

Document the local practice insights. This process was undertaken with assistance of the project workers and other service staff and captured the enabling factors and barriers from our local experience.

Why does it work?

Several key factors have supported the outcomes that have been achieved in this project. Some are concrete and practical; others are more intangible, but nonetheless critical:

Access to high quality bilingual facilitators is key to providing a good program that parents and children want to attend. Two of the three schools in the sites had already engaged bicultural workers to liaise with particular cultural groups represented in the local community. The project has encouraged the schools to strengthen and develop these roles to encompass a community development aspect including building connections with local services.

Resourcing of the project was critical. Available funding enables the project worker to support the initial development of the relationships in the sites and importantly the activities to engage children and parents.

The commitment of key players was an important factor. As the services saw successful engagement of parents and children, the buy-in has grown.

The employment of local community development/liaison workers has significantly enhanced the success of the local hub sites. The activities were successful because the local workers knew their communities and the support that families and children needed.

The articulation of a common purpose amongst the service providers in local neighbourhoods has been facilitated by bringing professionals together and assisting them to identify outcomes and activities that can be collectively pursued through local activities.

Research base

The evidence base for the development of Community Hubs emerges from both local and international research, and local practice experience. The concept of service integration, especially in the provision of services for children, has received much attention in recent years. Research undertaken across both the developed and developing world suggests that where services for children work together the outcomes for families are exponentially beneficial.

Poverty, unemployment, inadequate housing, poor health and nutrition (etc.) ... are the challenges hundreds of thousands of our youngsters and their families face every day. It is no wonder that children bring more than educational needs into the classroom ... and that families with infants and toddlers bring more than a need for parenting skills into a family support centre. It is an examination of these realities ... that has resulted in a new wave of state and local initiatives to provide more comprehensive and integrated services to children and their families. (Bruner et al., 1992, p. 1)

Although embryonic, the practice experience documented to date in the local communities of Hume through Best Start, Neighbourhood Renewal and, most recently, Communities for Children, supports the need for a greater level of investment in this work. There is a significant opportunity for this community to add to the research evidence of an integrated response to service provision regarding the outcomes for children and their families.

The work of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Project and Head Start in the US, and Sure Start in the UK, are perhaps the most well known studies involving forms of integrated children's services. They join many others - importantly, an increasing number in Australia - in detailing the way in which these services have been developed and what outcomes might be expected. Of particular note are the projects and studies underway in Australia and internationally, measuring the impact of full service schools.

The Australian Government's own evaluation report into the Full Service School program in 2001 found that:

There is general agreement and documented evidence that the Full Service Schools Program has had a significant impact on the educational opportunities of at risk young people and has demonstrated value for money. (Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, February 2001, p. 2)

While this project concentrated on youth, the gains made here could be greater should the interventions occur earlier in life. This is confirmed by current early years research.

Several key insights can be found in existing research into co-ordinated and integrated services. These include:

Outcomes

The specific outcome measures used through the projects followed the Communities for Children Strategic Plan 2005 and include:

Evidence of outcomes

The outcomes of an integrated approach demonstrate with great potency the value of the hub practice. We have measured and developed the impact of interventions and recorded the practice for advocacy and promotion. This section outlines the outcome measures, meanings, and results of the hub projects spanning over the last two years. It also includes Communities for Children local evaluation findings of the last 18 months. It should be noted that the project has not been subjected to a rigorous evaluation process but is based on more informal feedback and anecdotal evidence, with a collation of data that continues to inform practice.

The five projects working under the Hubs Humming strategy each took a slightly different approach to the work undertaken. While the approach varied from project to project, the outcomes and aims were achieved similarly and aimed to meet the needs of the local community. The outcomes of the strategy group are listed together. Although the five projects (across seven sites) are diverse in delivery and approach, the hub projects demonstrate outcomes by providing approaches that are responsive to community-identified needs. The learnings from each project's approach also contributed to a pool of knowledge that was shared within the strategy group (Hubs Strategy Group, 2007).

Both qualitative and quantitative data have been collected. Each of the sites recorded a number of children and parents who attended activities organised at the sites. These activities targeted people who had not attended activities before, or who had only a limited participation in the sites. In addition to the recording of the number of attendees (which has improved over the life of the project), the site worker undertook interviews with parents about their experience both before and after they became involved in the hubs.

Improved child language and literacy

Between 2005 and 2006, AEDI population-based results in the six targeted suburbs show improved numbers of children in Prep who have accessed preschool or child care, and reduced level of developmental vulnerability of children in two or more domains by 9.5% (or 20 children). Since working across sectors, Meadow Fair North Primary School has seen an improvement in the number of children starting school that have had a preschool experience, from 53% in 2005, to 86% in 2005, and 78% in 2007.

For children, the key outcomes were the development of skills, such as listening, socialising and engagement with books/stories and songs. Many parents have said that they read to their children or sang the songs with their children at home. This is indicative of the way the programs have encouraged parents to interact with their children outside the groups and all activities have contributed to the development of parent-child relationships. The benefits for children included learning new skills such as sharing, learning rules, settling in, and skills such as cutting and pre-reading skills. These skills were seen as beneficial by parents in starting school and preschool.

Established and/or strengthened community hubs

By planning together, services have worked to share expertise and develop new ways of engaging families through more informal activities such as playgroups, family fun days, transition-to-school programs, bilingual story time, early literacy events, morning teas, enrolment for preschool information and many more. Parents suggested events and ideas that they want to be a priority to bring people together locally. For example, on Harmony Day in March 2007, 120 parents participated in the "Celebrating Cultural Diversity in Hume City" event at Meadowbank Primary School (50% of school parents, 75% of Early Learning Centre parents). At Campbellfield, 90% of preschool parents and children attended the event held at the Campbellfield Heights Primary School. This level of parent participation has not been evident in the past.

Increased awareness of where to go for help with children.

The level of engagement among the projects and partner agencies has increased through regular meetings, networking, service co-ordination and collaboration. A sense of common purpose and clear goals has been established to ensure that a shared understanding is occurring at all levels and that this information is shared among the wider community. For example, although an information session set out at the Campbellfield Hub has been unsuccessful in engaging parents in 2006, thirteen workers from nine agencies have come together to show their level of support, trust and goodwill to work together. Harmony Day activities promoting multiculturalism in March 2007 at all sites had a level of parent participation not seen before, with over 170 parents attending the Harmony Day celebrations at the schools, which was a first for the area.

Increased social connectedness and support

Another important outcome of the hubs strategy is to enhance social connections and support for families. One of the ways that the hubs are working towards this outcome is to adopt an "open door" policy which encourages parents to become involved in some of the activities of the hub. Parents are invited to attend the hub at any time and can expect to be warmly welcomed, encouraged, and treated with respect. Through evaluation, the community partners from the hubs sites have shown that families have experienced enhanced social connections due to involvement in the hub.

Parents reported:

Overall, the responses by the parents have been overwhelmingly positive. The following provides an example of feedback describing the community strengthening of the Meadow Bank Hub activities. Parents reported on the benefits, naming activities that helped them to join in, the welcoming and friendly approach, and the family oriented and friendly atmosphere - all viewed as beneficial to parents.

Community members take an active interest in developing hubs

By working in a more coordinated way, children's services and schools have improved access to early years' programs. For example, cooperation between local government, primary schools and secondary services contributed to increased preschool participation in Broadmeadows. Five schools have opened up classrooms to run parent led playgroups. Parents have requested English and computer classes in school venues. These results have motivated further collaborative efforts to bring families together locally (Best Start Local Evaluation Report 2003-05).

Sharing key learnings

It was expected that workers in hubs communicate regularly during the year and visit each other's sites. Some have gone on to attend joint professional development, venue sharing, resource sharing and develop protocols and agreed processes as part of developing more collaborative action in the way programs are offered. Bilingual workers within a neighbourhood precinct have also become a vital resource for other workers to communicate with parents. For example, staff working at hub sites recently attended the "strengths-based training in working with families" funded by Communities for Children, in order to develop a common approach to family engagement. This was a "first" for sectors across preschool, playgroups, nursing, family support and community workers - all coming together to work on a localised approach.

In November 2006, the Early Years Partnership meeting offered a presentation on how service integration at community hubs was working in Hume City. The Brotherhood of St. Laurence, Broad Insight Group and Hume City Council presented on model development and challenges of this work.

Policy analysis

The Breaking Cycles by Building Neighbourhood Hubs project is a positive example of integrated, co-located and co-ordinated early children's and families services and approaches within neighbourhood localities.

Evaluation

An internal evaluation of the project has been conducted by evaluating feedback from parents and staff and assessment of administration data.

Project related publications

Hubs Strategy Group, (2007) Setting the hubs humming, working together for children and their families. Melbourne: Brotherhood of St Lawrence.

Hydon, C., Stanley, J., & Dyke, N. V. (in press). Building futures. Melbourne: The Brotherhood of St Laurence.

Warr, D. (2007), Outside the school gates: A model for tackling disadvantage and promoting participation in preschool education at the Meadowbank Early Learning Centre. Melbourne: University of Melbourne, Centre for Health and Society.

References

Bertram, T., Pascal, C., Bokhari, S., Gasper, M., Holtermann, S., John, K., et al. (2003). Early Excellence Centre: Pilot Programme Third Annual Evaluation Report 2001-2002. Birmingham: Centre for Research in Early Childhood.

Bruner, C. (1991). Thinking Collaboratively: Ten Questions and Answers to Help Policy Makers Improve Children's Services. Washington: Education and Human Service Consortium.

Carbone, S., Fraser, A., Ramburuth, R., & Nelms, L. (2004). Breaking Cycles Building Futures: Promoting Inclusion of Vulnerable Families in Antenatal and Universal Early Childhood Service: A Report on the First Three Stages. Melbourne: Department of Human Services.

Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (2001) National Evaluation Reoprt Full Service Schools Program 1999 and 2000, Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

Hubs Strategy Group, (2007) Setting the Hubs Humming, Working Together for Children and their Families. Melbourne: Brotherhood of St Lawrence

McCain, M. & Mustard, J. (2002) The Early Years Study Three Years Later: From Early Child Development to Human Development. Enabling Communities. Toronto: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research.

Schweinhart, L. J. (2005). The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40 Summary, Conclusions, and Frequently Asked Questions. Ypsilanti: High/Scope Press.

Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds). (2000). From neurons to neighbourhoods: The science of early childhood development. Committee on Integrating the Science of Early Childhood Development, National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Contact

Daniel Leach
Project Worker

Brotherhood of St Laurence
67 Brunswick Street
Fitzroy VIC 3065

Phone: (03) 9305 5100
Mobile: 0411 429 640
Email: dleach@bsl.org.au

Website

N/A

More information

More information on the Promising Practice Profiles can be found on the Communities and Families Clearinghouse Australia website.