a meta-analysis of community action projects: volume 2

A project funded by the Cross Departmental Contestable Fund through the Ministry of Health

A META-ANALYSIS OF COMMUNITY ACTION PROJECTS:

VOLUME II

Alison Greenaway Dr Sharon Milne Wendy Henwood Lanuola Asiasiga

Karen Witten

Centre for Social and Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation and Te Röpü Whäriki

Massey University PO Box 6137

Wellesley Street Auckland

Revised February 2004

Centre for Social and Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation and Te Röpü Whäriki 2 Te Rünanga, Wänanga, Hauora me te Paekaka

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME II OF THE META-ANALYSIS ................................................4

1 WAITOMO PAPAKAINGA TRACKER PROGRAMME ..................................................6 Context ............................................................................................................................6 Project practices..............................................................................................................7 Relationships...................................................................................................................8 Lessons learnt .................................................................................................................9

2 MOEREWA COMMUNITY PROJECT ..........................................................................11 Context ..........................................................................................................................11 Project practices............................................................................................................12 Relationships.................................................................................................................14 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................14

3 PEACEFUL WAVES / MATANGI MALIE .....................................................................17 Context ..........................................................................................................................17 Project practices............................................................................................................18 Relationships.................................................................................................................18 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................19

4 PASIFIKA HEALTHCARE GARDENING PROJECT ...................................................20 Project practices............................................................................................................21 Relationships.................................................................................................................21 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................22

5 WHAINGAROA CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT ........................................23 Context ..........................................................................................................................23 Project practices............................................................................................................25 Relationships.................................................................................................................29 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................30 Current status................................................................................................................32

6 HE RANGIHOU NEW DAY PROJECT (OF OPOTIKI SAFER COMMUNITIES COUNCIL) .....................................................................................................................33 Context ..........................................................................................................................34 History ...........................................................................................................................35 Management of the project............................................................................................36 Relationships.................................................................................................................37 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................38

7 ROUGH CUT YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.....................................................40 Context ..........................................................................................................................40 Project practices............................................................................................................42 Relationships.................................................................................................................43 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................44


8 CHRISTCHURCH YOUTH PROJECT ..........................................................................46 Context ..........................................................................................................................46 Project practices............................................................................................................46 Relationships.................................................................................................................47 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................48

9 TAIERI TRUST RIVER CATCHMENT PROJECT ........................................................50 Context ..........................................................................................................................50 Project practices............................................................................................................51 Relationships.................................................................................................................52 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................53

10 PACIFICA GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT PROJECT.....................................55 Context ..........................................................................................................................55 Project practices............................................................................................................56 Relationships.................................................................................................................57 Lessons learnt ...............................................................................................................58

APPENDIX: PROJECT DETAILS..........................................................................................59

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................60

TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: The 10 case studies ................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2: A tour of the Whaingaroa Catchment ..................................................................... 23 Figure 3: A project celebration held at a local marae ............................................................ 33 Figure 4: Celebrating the Rough Cut film screening.............................................................. 40 Figure 5: An aerial photograph of the Taieri River................................................................. 50


INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME II OF THE META-ANALYSIS

The Meta-analysis of Community Action Projects report is in two volumes. Volume I covers the background to the meta-analysis, introducing the concepts of collaboration, participation, relationship building and social change that are central to community action. The analysis is presented through a discussion of lessons learnt in the phases of activation, consolidation and transition or closure of community action projects. The case studies are presented in this volume. They reveal a diverse range of community action experiences and provide the detail from which the analysis in Volume I was developed. Each case study discusses the context in which the project was developed, the practices (activities and processes) used in its development, the relationships that shaped it, and some of the lessons learnt throughout its course. A chart providing an overview of each project is provided in the Appendix. These projects addressed very different issues and involved a range of approaches to change and structures for creating change. The terms used for various roles in the projects varied enormously, so for the purposes of this report we have used the terms in the box below to distinguish between the many players in the projects.

Glossary of terms used Agency: a unit of central or local government (eg, a department or ministry)

Funder: the agency that provided the core or initial funding for the project

Fund-holding organisation: the organisation that administered the funding for the project, if not for the project itself

Umbrella organisation: an organisation that provided some form of oversight for the project

Project provider: the group or organisation that directly implemented the project

Stakeholders: individuals and organisations that have a stake in the project and have participated in its development

Formative evaluation: evaluation undertaken from the start of the project − this assists the formation of the project through strategic planning, identification of indicators, research and knowledge, and skills sharing

Process evaluation: evaluation that documents the process being used to develop the project in order to inform the development of the project and future projects

Impact evaluation: evaluation that assesses the direct impact the project has had within a short timeframe (eg, within five years)

Outcome evaluation: evaluation that assesses the wider outcomes created by the project within a longer timeframe (eg, after five years)

External evaluation: evaluation where the evaluator was contracted from an organisation not directly involved with managing the project (this includes evaluators from the funding organisation)

Internal evaluation: evaluation where the evaluator was contracted from an organisation directly involved with managing the project (eg, a project member, or the co-ordinator).


Moerewa Community Project1. Moerewa2. He Iwi Kotahi Tātou Trust3. ALAC, CEG4. n/a5. Community development

including social, cultural and economic

6. 1995�

Peaceful Waves/Matangi Malie

1. Auckland2. Group Special Education3. Ministry of Health, Public

Health Directorate4. n/a5. Non-violence

programmes6. 1995�

Whaingaroa CatchmentManagement Project

1. Raglan2. Whaingaroa Environment3. Ministry for the Environment4. Process/impact5. Public meetings, tours of the

catchment, catchment management plan, formation of the Whaingaroa Environment Centre

6. 1995�

Rough Cut YouthDevelopment Project

1. Westport/Buller region2. Buller REAP3. Department of Internal

Affairs and Work and Income NZ

4. Process/impact5. Film-making course

including life skills training

6. 1999�2003

Waitomo PapakaingaTracker Programme

1. Kaitaia2. Waitomo Papakainga

Development Society Inc3. CYF, CPU4. Process/impact5. Youth development �

social, education, cultural6. 1998�2000

Pasifika HealthcareGardening Project

1. Waitakere City2. Pasifika Healthcare3. Waitakere DHB,

Healthlink4. n/a5. Community garden

and back garden competitions

6. 1998�

He Rangihou New Day Project1. Opotiki2. Opotiki Safer Communities

Council3. Ministries of Education and

Health4. Formative and impact5. Drug education, health

promotion, capacity building, Māori focus initiatives, policy consultation, alliance building awareness raising

6. 1998�

Christchurch Youth Project1. Christchurch2. Christchurch City Council

and Christchurch Police3. As above4. Process/impact5. Youth worker project working

Monday�Thursday with young offenders and their caregivers, referred by Police Youth Aid; street youth work on Friday nights

6. 1997� PACIFICA Governanceand Management Project1. Nationwide2. PACIFICA3. CEG4. n/a5. Governance and

management training for members

6. 2000�

TAIERI1. Otago2. TAIERI Trust3. SMF, NZ Landcare Trust, University of Otago4. Process/impact5. Development and management of a

community-based catchment management project. Activities include workshops and education in schools and community.

6. 1999�

Key1. Location2. Provider3. Funder(s)4. Type of evaluation5. Activities6. Duration

Figure 1: The 10 case studies1

1 ALAC = Alcohol Advisory Council of New Zealand; CEG = Community Employment Group; CPU = Crime

Prevention Unit; CYF = Department of Child, Youth and Family; DHB = District Health Board; REAP = Rural Education Activities Programme.


1 WAITOMO PAPAKAINGA TRACKER PROGRAMME

Location: Kaitaia

Duration: 1998�2000

Provider: Waitomo Papakainga Development Society Inc.

Purpose: to reduce offending among Maori young people

Funder: Crime Prevention Unit; Child, Youth and Family

Fund-holding organisation: n/a

Evaluation: formative-process and impact-outcome evaluation by Pam Oliver & Kellie Spee from January 1998 to May 2000

Data used in analysis: interviews with the co-ordinator and two whänau members; programme reports

Evaluation reports: June 2000; presentation to Evaluation Advisory Group May 2000

Current status: not funded, in a process of redevelopment

Context

The Waitomo Papakainga Development Society is an incorporated society, formed by the Rawiri whänau and whanaunga in 1993. In 1998 the whänau obtained funding for the Waitomo Papakainga Tracker Programme. The Tracker Programme was one of many the Society was involved with.2 Based on tikanga Mäori, whanaungatanga roles and responsibilities, and a whänau/hapü development approach, the initial Tracker Programme idea emerged from the whänau �just doing what they needed to do� to address the issues they could see in the young people around them. It was initiated as a kaitiaki structure focused on their whenua.

Our men took turns, it was like a one on one thing ... Then we thought this is a choice looking idea, let�s turn it into a programme and we did. (Interview � project member)

The whänau had a long history of concern, interest and involvement with the young people of the area and their issues, and had worked together to provide alternatives for those with needs that often surfaced through the justice system. They had always helped young people with problems in a very practical way:

... just on a whänau thing. We didn�t have contracts with any organisation, any agency to be funded for this kind of stuff, we were doing it because we wanted to help the kids. (Interview � project member)

2 Another Waitomo Papakainga programme was the Tihei Programme, which was recently evaluated by the

Department of Internal Affairs (Research Services).


The Tracker Programme was set up as an intense �live in� outdoor programme where groups of youth, deemed by the department of Child Youth and Family to be at risk, would live and work with mentors for a three-week period. A follow-up period of work with the whänau extended the period of contact to at least 10 weeks. The timeframe was regarded as a minimum period in which the young people could make any significant lifestyle changes, but ongoing contact was encouraged to reinforce and sustain positive change. An ongoing concern to the whänau was the external influence of funding on the project. The whänau members felt that their community initiatives were often changed and adapted to fit particular contractual obligations and compliance requirements at the expense of their original intentions. The local kaupapa and tikanga were often compromised in order to comply with government policy and procedures. An example of this was the naming of the Tracker Programme. Child Youth and Family funds tracker programmes to provide intensive care for young people deemed to be �at risk�. They suggested the service provided by the whänau could become one of their programmes, and so the programme was named the Tracker Programme. However, the whänau believed that �Kaitiaki�, the name given by the whänau, better reflected their way of working. After the Tracker Programme had been running for some time officials from Te Puni Kökiri and the Department of Internal affairs spoke to the whänau about the positive results the programme appeared to be achieving. The whänau were encouraged to put in a tender for a new Crime Prevention Unit initiative for Mäori community projects. A whänau hui made the decision to take this step, and they were subsequently offered a contract in 1998. The offer was regarded as an acknowledgement from the local agencies of the work already being done by this whänau with young people in the area. The Tracker Programme was one of six national projects selected by the Crime Prevention Unit in 1998 for a three-year pilot project targeting youth at risk of offending. Mäori groups offering whänau-, hapü- or iwi-based programmes that had the potential to reduce offending were invited to apply. In order to meet the requirements of the Crime Prevention Unit funding the Waitomo Papakainga Development Society had to become more formalised. Dealing with the various government agencies also made for complex administration systems. With little infrastructure in place there were unrealistic expectations from both the whänau and the Crime Prevention Unit of what could be achieved with the programme funding that was obtained. The whänau were not prepared for the changes and implications of switching from a voluntary approach to that of a government-funded contract. Their interest was in helping young people and whänau, not in developing programme structures:

... our organisation didn�t set out to be a mini Rünanga or mini trust board ... when we started our trust we didn�t envisage it having to have infrastructure and managers and policies and procedures, you know we just came in as whänau ... Just do it. (Interview � project member)

Project practices

The Waitomo Papakainga Tracker Programme is managed by the whänau, who meet monthly. The committee consults widely with iwi, hapü and whänau as part of their decision-making process, as well as with government agencies and organisations in their district. The underlying strategy behind the Tracker Programme was to give young people an experience different to their usual daily routines using the resources available to the whänau. The natural environment of an isolated whänau beach site with few amenities provided the setting to work with the young people and to help them with their issues. It was quality time, 24 hours a day commitment, and the whänau regarded it as a �natural thing to do�. The


whänau approach went some way to plugging long-identified service gaps in the Far North for whänau with youth justice issues (Oliver and Spee 2000). The Tracker Programme�s kaupapa are to (Oliver and Spee 2000):

• provide 24-hour care for youth at risk, which involves removing them from negative influences that have contributed to their �at risk� situation

• provide intensive care and support to rangatahi and their whänau, and thus enhance the unity of the whänau

• provide rangatahi with a sense of whanaungatanga, Māoritanga and tinorangatiratanga • (ultimately) reduce offending and enhance wellbeing, both among individuals and their

whänau and within the community at large. The basis for the whänau approach to the Tracker Programme was a strong tikanga Mäori belief system. The strength of commitment to kaupapa Mäori frameworks and ideologies provided a solid foundation on which to develop their work with young people. Strong accountability to both the whänau being worked with and the wider community was regarded as paramount, and relied on the whole whänau undertaking roles and responsibilities. Whänau was the basis of the programme. On reflection, the whänau identified that this framework became their mechanism to develop appropriate policies for the Development Society:

.... it was all about being natural for us ... part of who we are. Our organisation itself is based on tikanga. All the programmes have got that strength going right through them. (Interview � project member)

Building a review process into the operations became important, although initially it was no more than an informal stop every now and again. As the programme developed, the whänau recognised that it was useful to reflect and rethink their direction based on their experience and the issues that emerged. Not only was it found to be useful in terms of highlighting any issues that needed further work, but it was also beneficial to affirm the focus and core beliefs of the approach taken by the whänau.

Relationships

The whänau expressed concern about a lack of meaningful funder−provider negotiation at the outset of their relationship with the Crime Prevention Unit. Their perspective was that the Unit did not understand the local issues that needed to be addressed. Members of the whänau thought this lack of understanding and negotiation had led to unrealistic expectations by both the whänau and the funder about what the whänau had the capacity to achieve. At times the whänau found themselves rationalising the benefits of funding with the desire to retain their own autonomy and keep to the original kaupapa. From initially being very proactive and participating in numerous consultation-type hui in the area initiated by various government agencies, the whänau eventually tired of this approach as they felt it was a one-way street. It was noted that little was ever followed up or actioned from local input unless there was direct communication at Ministry level. External evaluators were required to have an understanding of the whänau approach to ensure trust and rapport were established prior to the evaluation starting. The role of the evaluators, who made two site visits per year, was regarded as helpful, as the process enabled some of the issues being faced by the programme and the community to be highlighted at a government level through the regular progress reports.


Lessons learnt

We didn�t even come into it looking to form relationships with government agencies to get funding, we were just going to do it ... off our own bat ... out of our own pockets ... but then as the need became greater, what little money we did have wasn�t enough and that is why I think we were influenced into looking at other avenues to fund all these numbers of kids that were coming in for help. It was either go that way or we can�t handle it on just our money. Once out there the work just came, yes, it just came. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

As the programme profile increased, so did the workload. The contracted tasks required an increasing level of policy and procedural support. The whänau found that the Development Society did not have the capacity to keep the programme running at such a pace and attend to the administration as well. The fact that whänau made up the workforce put enormous personal pressure on each individual member. The evaluation (Oliver and Spee 2000) of the programme found it to be under-resourced and to rely heavily on volunteers from within the whänau to work together and support each other. For example, when training was offered for some staff to develop a policy document, it relied on the commitment and good will of the whänau to maintain the programmes and their homes in their absence. There was no provision for relief cover. During periods of overload, programme workers reported that self-care was reduced and stress levels soared, which had a detrimental impact on the whänau. The whänau noted that the lack of core resources for administration affected their ability to put time and energy into strategising, planning and further developing the business aspects of the Society. The Crime Prevention Unit funding for the project was not renewed, on the basis that the programme lacked policies and procedures to work safely with the young people undertaking the programme. While the whänau acknowledged that there were compliance issues that needed addressing, they also felt they needed time to reassess how to manage the growth of the programme and its impact on the development and direction of the organisation. They realised that the organisation had grown faster than they should have let it. In response to these pressures the whänau sought additional funding from Te Puni Kökiri to assist with the organisation�s management systems and planning needs. Although all the staff had come to the programme with skills, most were not prepared or trained for the types of issues they were required to deal with. Staff development came through trial and error, according to the co-ordinator, and this was particularly the case for administration skills:

It highlighted that we needed training in different areas. Even that policy stuff, we didn�t even know what a policy was. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

There was also a tension between, on the one hand, the whänau wanting to stick to their kaupapa, based on the practical benefits of the programme to the young people, and, on the other hand, the demands of compliance that came with funding. For a while there was an element of uncertainty among the whänau about whether the two paradigms were compatible:

A couple of years ago we saw it as tikanga vs policy. If we wanted the funding we�ve had to try to fit the two together. And they didn�t really fit until this year when we rewrote our policy document. We decided to just write about tikanga and left it to the government agencies to take out of it whatever they wanted to. So our policies now reflect what we know. (Interview � project co-ordinator)


The whänau felt strongly about the community being better placed than government agencies to make decisions and policy regarding the types of programmes that would make a difference to the young people in the area. They also felt that little credit was given by the agencies they dealt with for the pool of existing knowledge and understanding the local community contributed. This position was supported by Child, Youth and Family officials working in the area, who expressed their concern to the whänau when the Tracker programme was put on hold. The Tracker Programme whänau struggled to find ways of getting acknowledgement from the Crime Prevention Unit for the small but important changes that occurred for the young people on the programme. Intangible aspects of positive change arising from their work were often overlooked or not recognised as being of any consequence:

How do you evaluate a change of attitude, how do you get it to the government thing, how do you measure it in their sense? We didn�t realise that they were called outcomes. If a kid came out smiling and started changing their behaviours and attitudes we thought �choice, that is a good thing�. We just know as Mäori, as whänau, that these kids were changing and changing for the better. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

In spite of the evaluation report outlining a range of positive outcomes for the programme participants, the programme funding was ended as the result of funder concerns at the lack of supporting infrastructure. The current recess period has allowed the organisation time to address the training and policy issues raised, and the whänau is being assisted by Child Youth and Family (who consistently provided small amounts of funding to the whänau in their role as an accredited caregiver) to undertake these developments.


2 MOEREWA COMMUNITY PROJECT

Location: Moerewa, Northland

Duration: 1998 − present Provider: He Iwi Kotahi Tatou Trust

Purpose: to use a community development approach to address drug and alcohol issues in Moerewa

Funder: Alcohol Advisory Council of NZ, Community Employment Group

Fund-holding agency: n/a

Evaluation: n/a

Data used in analysis: interviews with one project team member and the evaluator (also a team member); project reports and documents, plus a CD compilation of project interviews; media reports

Current status: two-year extension to pilot (in final year 2003)

Context

The Moerewa Community Project was developed as part of a New Zealand-based World Health Organization initiative. Funding was obtained from the Alcohol Advisory Council (ALAC) in 1998 to initiate a programme to address the community�s drug and alcohol problems using a community development framework. ALAC staff approached members of the He Iwi Kotahi Tätou Trust, who lived and worked in Moerewa and understood drugs and alcohol to be a symptom rather than a cause of the issues facing the town. The Trust developed the project from the perspective that change could only be created if the broader historical issues facing Moerewa were addressed. The initial three-year pilot project began in 1998 and was later extended for two years. He Iwi Kotahi Tätou Charitable Trust was established in 1987 primarily as a provider of training programmes. Changes were made to the governance level of the Trust in 1995 when a community development approach to the work of the Trust was introduced. The Trust moved away from primarily providing training services to a more holistic community development approach creating strategies for positive long-term change in the community:

At the time we didn�t know what community development was, but we knew it was something about finding out about the needs of the community and finding services and programmes to meet those needs ... We knew that if we painted the town it wouldn�t stop graffiti. We�d be wasting our time. The first thing that needed to happen was to change the mindsets of people. (Davis and Davis [no date]: 3−4)

The focus on grassroots development enabled the Trust to move away from dealing with presenting issues in a superficial and ad hoc manner, and towards trying to identify and work with the root causes of deprivation. These were understood to be welfare dependency, low self-esteem, powerlessness, and a lack of community spirit. Understanding the history and experiences of the people in Moerewa and how these had arisen enabled the members of the Trust to make sense of the apparent deprivation, loss of hope and loss of spirit within the community.


In addition to experiencing a loss of control over their destiny, the people of Moerewa also identified major changes occurring within previously strong whänau/hapü structures:

We (the community) have felt the impact of decisions made about us, not by us. We don�t know who made the decision. We don�t know who controlled that. We�re in real victim mode. We may not be able to stop an effect on us, but we can understand it and we can respond better about it, instead of just hitting out at anything. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Trustees were elected from the community to provide accountability and transparency. Nominations were encouraged from community people who were interested in community change and not afraid to challenge and critique the operations of the Trust. A management team comprising operational staff was in place from 1995. The Trust made a specific decision not to appoint just one manager for the Trust. Instead a collective approach to management has developed. Members asserted this strengthened the work of the Trust by encompassing a broad range of perspectives and by building teamwork. In 1998 the Trust formed a project team to develop the project that ALAC had approached them to undertake. A co-ordinator and a project worker were appointed as part of the project team. Public meetings were held, from which a project plan emerged based around three goals:

• to initiate opportunities and activities for meeting the needs of the young people in the area

• to inspire the young people of the area • to investigate meaningful and motivational occupations and to create an environment

that would foster change.

Project practices

The first step for the project team was to identify and explore the issues the community was facing. This was done by working closely with the young people, listening to their stories and ideas. During this time a kaupapa emerged, and this became the basis for the approach the project team developed to meet the needs of young people in Moerewa:

... we got to an understanding of the level of what was actually happening ... No judgment ... this is what our community really looks like ... we had no idea of some of the issues at the time ... In some things we were in shock about some of the depravities ... that was what we had to get our heads around ... many didn�t realise the level of things that were happening ... it was like taking the top of a boil off and all the stuff was oozing out and we saw the reality. What people were doing they were just trying to put ointment on the sore, they were never really dealing with what was happening and the depth of what was happening. That is a good description in the sense that you saw the leaves, but nobody was directing the focus at the root of the problem. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Understanding and owning what belonged to the Moerewa community and identifying and discarding the issues that did not went some way to reducing the burden felt by many participants of the project. It was regarded by the project team as a major step in the process and a major turning point in thinking. While the process challenged the community to make some changes − to confront and tackle the hard issues of sexual abuse, violence, and alcohol and drug abuse − it also allowed and encouraged people to stop taking on board all the bad things that had happened which they were not responsible for:


Once we owned our stuff we could see the stuff that wasn�t ours, because we tended to blame ourselves for everything. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

The community were encouraged to use and strengthen the tools familiar to them, such as working through issues as whänau, and drawing on tikanga Mäori collective and holistic processes and approaches. Working together has been a key development in the community, a project to rebuild the public toilet was one example that demonstrated the benefits of sharing methods, ideas, solutions and energy. With increased understanding of the issues the community were facing, the project team developed numerous activities aimed at inspiring community spirit and vision, which was seen to be a key step towards achieving their goals. The team captured the vision that was developing in the phrase �Moerewa on the Move�. This was presented at a community meeting and caught the interest of many that attended. A three-day festival was put on. Approximately 700 people attended and the team received extremely positive feedback from participants. The project recognised that the community expected to see visible outcomes each year. For these reasons the project team regularly created activities such as a mural, community events and the make-over of a local building. The building of the community toilet was a catalyst for people to come together to work on a community project. According to members of the Trust, this activity was critical in building relationships among the community, who were inspired by the visible difference they were able to make to their environment. This activity also led to other developments and opportunities:

It wasn�t just a toilet! The young people saw their uncles and aunties building and planting. After it was built no one wanted to damage the toilet because they had been part of creating it. The toilet symbolises a battle won and new understandings learnt by our community. (Davis and Davis [no date]:5)

The Trust began to market Moerewa as �Tuna Town� and purchased a block of local shops for businesses to be established. The Trust believe that these events and initiatives started to help the people of Moerewa to feel good about themselves and their town and paved the way for a community building and rejuvenation process. The Trust built on the uniqueness of the town and showed that the town and its people had an economic value. They also focused on helping to change the �spirit� of the community by reflecting on the strong cultural heritage of the area, promoting Moerewa as a place where Mäori were succeeding and could feel proud:

The three years we spent self-esteem building, raising the spirit and consciousness of the community was critical ... We were creative with the resources we had. (Davis and Davis [no date]:6�7)

The Trust made a commitment to up-skill community people rather than employ �outsiders�, as had happened in the past. Commitment to the kaupapa was identified as the key attribute for participation in the project, rather than any specific skill, which the team maintained could be learnt. These types of decisions taken by the trustees became an empowering new approach for the community. Evaluation and reflection are valued within the organisation. A range of forums involving all community stakeholders was initiated for consultation purposes and for the input of ideas and experiences. In addition to written feedback sheets, verbal comments at hui or meetings were sought. Contributions from community people who chose not to participate formally at forums were considered most valuable. These were gathered when project team members attended local functions or just met people in the street.


Relationships

People were the obvious strength and resource of the project. The project team had the ability to initiate, facilitate and provide leadership that drew on the strengths of the community. This was found to be crucial for making change in Moerewa. The project team�s ongoing communication with the wider community was held up by the team as a key ingredient, establishing a sense of ownership, direction and credibility. Members of the Trust effectively created dialogue with a range of government agencies about the issues they were addressing and the solutions they had found. The Trust�s process for forming relationships with government agencies has been a point of learning and development over the last few years. The Trust�s focus on building community strength and ownership has enabled the people of Moerewa to reach a position where they are no longer prepared to compromise their control over community issues. The experience of working on community projects has hardened the resolve of the Trust that authority and decisions regarding the destiny of the Moerewa community must remain within the community. The Trust makes it clear that it is no longer prepared to devolve control to outside agencies, even if it means having to forgo funding opportunities. Members of the project team suggested that their work would be enhanced if representatives of funding agencies understood the context and rationale for this stance. Respondents were adamant that models of development imported into and imposed on the community were generally alien to the realities of the community and therefore unlikely to create sustainable changes:

Community members built something better because we planned it, we drove it and we put it into action. This was a key component of what took place in the development of this town. It is about people wanting to be part of the change makers. (Davis and Davis [no date]:2)

Relationships with community members were constantly reviewed by the project team to ensure a range of appropriate forums was available for input and feedback. The project team asserted that their accountability is first and foremost to the community:

I have to walk down the street in Moerewa and look at people daily and I am accountable to them ... it is a daily reminder of my accountability to this community ... The only time I get nervous is when I have to stand before my own. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Lessons learnt

The project team have identified and documented significant times of change throughout the project and based their decisions on these. The Moerewa community development model has been an evolving process with evolving strategies. The importance of process was reiterated by the respondents throughout the interview, especially in reference to Mäori process models:

It is a practice, a process. Why they could argue in the old days and come up with a unanimous decision was because they had a process working. We�ve lost sight of that process. (Interview � project co-ordinator)


While diversity is valued and encouraged, an agreed vision and kaupapa for the project were seen as the first important step. It was acknowledged that many strategies might be used to reach the same goal, but the vision and the intangible things that drove the project needed to remain constant and form the foundation on which the project was built. Getting to this stage, however, has been a long, slow process that has required building the capacity and strength of the community. Change appears to have come through building on tangible development options, along with guidance from the overall vision for the community, which is the intangible value base. Trustees have identified three phases of development in their work. The starting point of the project was referred to as the �nobody� or �dependency� stage, when nobody knew what was happening and the big companies ran the town and made all the decisions. The second phase, the �somebody� or �independent� stage, followed as a result of the project group investigating, challenging, questioning and researching issues of concern and providing alternative approaches. The trustees stopped trying to fit their own kaupapa into other frameworks for funding purposes and stopped accepting all the programmes offered to Moerewa that were seen by �outsiders� as good for the town. Since then, decisions based on the agreed kaupapa have been driven by change, not funding. They have introduced and promoted the notion of choice for Moerewa people with a focus on creating and proactively seeking meaningful opportunities with relevance to the community and its aspirations:

We have refused money ... it takes a cool nerve ... but if you take them you can jeopardise the big picture. (Davis and Davis [no date]:8)

The community wanted to actively pursue their own methods based on a range of more collective strategies and move beyond independence to the third stage, �interdependence�, seeking the real catalyst for change where �everybody� would be involved, talking to each other and supporting each other with initiatives that would benefit the wider community. There was a tension between the project team�s determination to establish and maintain the momentum for change and the confidence to trust in the process of delegating tasks to community people who had yet to prove their commitment to the project. This tension highlighted the ease with which key project team members could have fallen into the trap of �gate-keeping�. Involvement in the community development process provided an immense amount of personal and professional growth for the project team, which resulted in these issues being identified and addressed. Others are now trusted more readily and their skills utilised more effectively. Conflict was seen by the project team as something to be expected when working with such a range of issues facing a small and diverse community. Some regarded change as a scary thing. However, by determining a shared community vision and kaupapa at the beginning of the project, a process and some tools for conflict resolution were put in place. The project team acknowledged that the process required ongoing practice, but having a value base to guide problem-solving provided an empowering and dynamic environment for decision-making. The project team sees the exchange of information between stakeholders as crucial for ideas from Moerewa to be considered at a policy level. Regional agency relationships were developed that are now starting to bear fruit. Members of the Trust noted that government−community consultation processes were generally inadequate and inappropriate. The team�s comments made reference to the academic and jargon-laden language used in communication. A lack of community response from Moerewa had often been misinterpreted by government agencies as a lack of interest or concern about the issues presented. However, it was identified that if appropriate consultation processes were


used, more realistic insights into the enhancers and barriers to community change could help inform policy more effectively. One respondent said:

To get good policy you have to have a process of dialogue that is real for everybody ... This stuff actually alienates and continues to perpetuate the problem ... it is one of the barriers that agencies put up, for our people to be contributors. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

The project has had difficulty reconciling the long-term nature of the issues being addressed with the generally short-term funding cycle. An additional challenge has been to meet the expectations of tangible outcomes from both the funder and community, given that the project has lifted the lid on a wide range of inter-generational issues which appear to have far-reaching implications. The project team have learnt that the process of creating change requires a long-term commitment to building relationships and resources at both a community, and a policy and funding level.


3 PEACEFUL WAVES / MATANGI MALIE

Location: Auckland

Duration: 1995−

Provider: Group Special Education, Ministry of Education Purpose: to eliminate violence

Funder: Ministry of Health


Evaluation: no formal evaluation, but regular reporting and annual written reports to Ministry of Health

Data used in analysis: interviews with two team members; informal discussions with other team members and participants; attendance at two programme sessions; project report

Current Status: two-year contract with Ministry of Health in progress � ceases 2004.

Context

Violence has been an ongoing issue among Pacific communities in Aotearoa New Zealand and in the Pacific:3

In Aotearoa New Zealand, western models and knowledge generally inform our understanding of �violence� and �abusive behaviour� in families and our programmes for prevention. To be able to construct effective violence prevention programmes for different cultures we need to have a clear understanding of the practices and beliefs of those different societies. While pointing out the dangers of western ethnocentrism, many researchers have also pointed out the dangers of extreme cultural relativism where abusive behaviour is justified as cultural. (Asiasiga and Gray 1998)

Peaceful Waves / Matangi Malie is a third-party contract funded by the Ministry of Health and run by Group Special Education (formerly Specialist Education Services). Peaceful Waves / Matangi Malie was set up as an initiative for the Auckland Samoan and Tongan communities in response to the issue of family violence within Pacific communities. The programme explores anger management in a Pacific context. In 1995 a resource teacher of learning and behaviour became concerned about the effects of violence on the children she worked with. As a result of her concern, she and her brother set up Peaceful Waves. A year later a church reverend, who had previously trained as a psychiatric nurse and counselled Samoan families, joined them. Due to the success of the Peaceful Waves initiative, the funder extended the programme to the Tongan community. Two more people joined and the Peaceful Waves team and Matangi Malie was born.

3 See Hand et al (2002), Stone (1999), Boshier (1999), Cribb (1997), Schoeffel et al (1996), Duituturaga (1988).


Project practices

Peaceful Waves / Matangi Malie started off working with parents and families in the churches. In the third year of the contract it shifted some of the focus to schools, but then moved back to working with churches because of the low response from parents in schools. They then delivered the programme to Pacific providers as a way of reaching a different audience. They have also started delivering their non-violence message through radio programmes to reach an even wider audience. The team is often called upon to workshop their programme at one-off events such as ALAC�s Pacific Spirit Conference and in venues outside Auckland. The programme was previously managed by the former Specialist Education Services but recently came under the new National Manager for Pacific position in the Ministry of Education (Group Special Education). Although the contract is managed by Group Special Education, it is funded by the Ministry of Health. The team all work full time, so meetings have to be organised for the evenings or weekends. They meet to plan workshops, analyse the delivery sessions, and to reflect on and evaluate how delivery could be improved. They also have to report their progress to an advisory community reference group set up by Group Special Education. Their contract includes the professional training and development of presenters, which they can access through Group Special Education. If funding allows, they can also attend other short courses and conferences. They would like to develop their own training and resources so that they can be �by Pacific for Pacific�. The funding is only for the Auckland region. The contract is funded for two years and a written report is required on an annual basis. The report covers the number of times the programme has been delivered, the target audience and the project team meetings.

Relationships

The team reported a good relationship with their funder, the Public Health Directorate in the Ministry of Health, �based on the understanding that we need each other for this to work�. The Ministry of Health has been open to and supportive of changes in the delivery of the project. One of the team members had already developed a relationship with the funder through his previous job in the Health Funding Authority. The programme is also well supported by Group Special Education. Developing good relationships with the various churches was seen by the team as very important, and in particular being able to work across denominations. Pacific people tend to maintain links with the Church, and there is anecdotal evidence that they still acknowledge denominational affiliation even when they no longer attend. The Church remains the pivot of the different Pacific communities because of its role in spirituality, social interaction, maintenance and development of ethnic language and culture, social support, education, and disseminating information. The team�s good relationship with their communities has been behind the success of the project. As highlighted below in relation to lessons learnt, the team have been responsive to suggestions from the communities and flexible in their delivery. Their relationship with other Pacific providers who might be providing a similar type of programme has been minimal because of the need for Peaceful Waves / Matangi Malie team members to follow and


practise the philosophy of �absolutely no hitting�. Recent experience with another provider indicated that this provider was not advocating non-violence but rather controlled hitting:

Absolutely we do not support that here. The people who we bring on the programme have to be non-hitting � believe in non-hitting because if they don�t, it destroys the message ... Because if you go out into the community and they say what�s the use of you talking to us when one of your team members nearly killed his son by [giving] his son a big hiding. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Lessons learnt

In the early days the team found it difficult to work with school communities, because parents would not always turn up to schools. Because two of the Samoan presenters were church ministers they were able to reach people through their church networks. However, that was also a problem because they were not able to access other denominations. When they thought through this problem they realised that delivering the programme to Pacific health providers was a way of breaking that denominational barrier and letting people see that the programme was �not coming from a church or denomination specific approach� (Interview � project co-ordinator). In fact some church leaders asked the team to come to their churches after taking part in a health provider session. The team realised there was an even wider audience to be reached, especially when people told them they needed to reach people outside the churches. This led them to set up radio presentations. One of the team comes from a background in health promotion and was familiar with the successful outreach of radio among Pacific peoples. The team also drew on the evidence of research carried out by a market research company about the listeners of 531 PI, a popular Pacific radio station. The team adapted the programme to make it suitable for radio. The radio programmes are delivered in Samoan, Tongan and English and reach a wide audience. Community feedback has been positive, with evidence that Pacific people want to understand more about the anger process. As well, younger parents appear to be moving away from their parents� philosophy of �I hit you because I love you�. Each of these lessons learnt has been a turning point for the programme and has come about through listening to comments from the community and problem-solving through team discussion. This is done by examining the feedback from the sessions from participants and from other team members. Usually only two or three members take responsibility for delivering the programme, which means there are usually two others listening and observing. The team members all feel passionate about the programme and say they do it not just for other people but also for themselves:

... It keeps reminding me about my own feelings and how to control them and how I can relate to people and all the parishioners that I�m working with. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

The team would like the programme to be extended to other Pacific communities and outside Auckland. Although the terms �Pacific community� or �communities� are used, the feeling was that there needed to be some emphasis put on the development of the different terms and concepts of community and models of development among the different Pacific peoples. In one of the interviews there was concern that the use of English terms and concepts would impose another world view on Pacific communities and destroy the nuances and peculiarities of the different Pacific cultures and languages.


4 PASIFIKA HEALTHCARE GARDENING PROJECT

Location: West Auckland

Duration: 1998−

Provider: Pasifika Healthcare

Purpose: to promote wellbeing through good nutrition and physical activity outdoors

Funder: through partnering agreement with Waitakere Health Link and Waitakere Hospital, well child promotion and mental health community support work contracts


Evaluation: no formal evaluation

Data used in analysis: interviews with the co-ordinator for Community Health Services and the Tongan community health worker; photographic report; article about the project in Health Promotion Forum newsletter

Current status: ongoing

Context Pacific peoples are migrants in Aotearoa New Zealand and food plays an important part in maintaining cultural identity. Traditionally, in their home islands, Pacific peoples cultivated gardens and lived off the produce from them. Pacific cultures have always enjoyed starchy foods such as taro and yams as the main part of the meal, with protein as the accompaniment. Research carried out with Tongan and Samoan communities showed that participants ranked starchy foods and protein as the most important foods, while fruit and other vegetables were regarded as foods to be eaten when people were not well (Moata�ane et al 1996, Leota and Leota 1997). The evidence from the Samoan study seems to show that the longer people have lived in Aotearoa New Zealand, the more likely they are to have changed their eating habits to include vegetables, salads and fruit. There is an association between diet and the onset of non-communicable diseases such as diabetes and coronary heart disease. Obesity, high blood pressure and low physical activity are risk factors for developing coronary heart disease and diabetes. Pacific populations have a high rate of obesity, which is seen as the most important factor in the development of Type 2 diabetes (Bell et al 1999/2000). It is estimated that between 80 and 90 percent of all adult-onset diabetes (in contrast to childhood-onset, or insulin-dependent, diabetes) is associated with obesity, particularly abdominal obesity (Egger and Swinburn 1996). The Gardening Project was set up by Pasifika Healthcare (the clinic and operational arm of West Auckland Pacific Island Health Fono Inc) to encourage Pacific peoples to eat more vegetables and have a healthier lifestyle:

Some of our families only eat taro and corned beef and no vegetables to go with it. We are trying to educate them to eat healthy and [have a] healthy lifestyle. Back home it is different; we sweat in the sun to do our planting and all our other work. (Interview � project co-ordinator)


Project practices

The Gardening Project began as a pilot nutrition project in some preschools in West Auckland in 1998 when they found that Pacific preschoolers were not eating vegetables. They introduced gardening with the idea that children would plant vegetables, care for and watch their seedlings grow, and then harvest and eat them. The concept behind the preschool project led to the setting up of the Backyard Garden Competition in West Auckland, where families entering the competition have to grow at least five varieties of vegetables and five varieties of flowers. Gardening was seen as a way of helping Pacific people to re-acquaint themselves with the skills they used back in their home islands. In 2001/02 about 89 families took part in the competition. The co-ordinator for Community Health Services was the judge. She visited all the gardens in the competition in January 2002 and looked at the crops being grown to see what types of plants were being grown and whether they were grown from purchased seed or plants, or from cuttings, or from seeds from other plants. She was also interested in how the gardens were being managed − whether it was in an eco-friendly way. Some houses had grounds that were completely concrete but families were creative and planted in old bathtubs and tyres. In 2002, building on the success of the Backyard Garden Competition, a community garden was set up on land behind the Waitakere Hospital, owned by the Waitemata District Health Board. The plants for the community garden were purchased out of a grant from Healthlink. The community garden was set up to provide produce for needy families. The funding for this project was originally one-off. It was intended for the production of a video about diabetes, but the organisation was able to convince the funder (Waitakere Healthlink) that the garden project was worthy of funding and that it would contribute to the prevention of diabetes. The project has kept going through other community projects such as well child promotion and mental health community support work. The team is trying to work out a way to get more funding. They were working closely with the Early Child Development Unit and were hoping to get funding for the preschool programme, but when a meeting was organised the Early Child Development Unit did not come. A similar project with preschools in South Auckland was funded. The land for the community garden was given on a year-by-year basis by Waitakere General Hospital, so use of the land must be applied for each year. The garden is shared with Pasifika�s Mental Health Team, who have taken one end of the garden. The staff and consumers enjoy working in the garden. Someone from the Tongan community is employed to maintain the community garden. Volunteers meet to decide what will be planted and to work in the garden on Saturdays.

Relationships

A relationship with the wider Pacific communities was essential for setting up the community garden. The team has built up a relationship with the different Pacific communities through the Preschool Gardening Programme and then through the Backyard Competition. The team is also involved in other community health projects carried out by Pasifika Healthcare. However, the Tongan community, in particular, has taken a keen interest in the community garden. While the Backyard Competition reaches across the different Pacific communities it


has been difficult to get a cross-section of the communities involved with the community garden. The team expressed concerns about the experiences they had trying to build relationships with various government agencies and key individuals. At one point they thought they had the support of an agency for the preschool gardening programme, but this subsequently fell through. The team are not sure of the reasons for this and are hopeful that this relationship will be re-established. A further disappointment came when they were unable to secure the support of a tertiary professor who had offered to provide seedlings for the preschools and assist with information. An important spin-off from the competition and the community garden has been the interest in gardening generated throughout West Auckland. For example, a community project based in Ranui has recently set up a community garden.

Lessons learnt

The development of the project from preschool gardening to the Backyard Garden Competition and then the community garden seemed to be a natural progression given the aims of the project to promote good nutrition and healthy lifestyles. The team reflected that not everyone in the community was aware of the aims and goals of setting up the community garden. They thought they had communicated clearly to the community that the garden�s produce was for needy families who may not work on the garden but who needed vegetables. Despite this, some people thought the garden was only for them and did not realise that the produce from the garden was also for other families. Due to a misunderstanding, two people managed the community garden with one being paid while the other was not. The project team reflected that this too was because of lack of clear communication:

We ended up with ... two people who are looking after the kaianga but we pay one and the other one is not happy, something like that, we have to communicate properly. That is the way of learning, I can see ... Making a small mistake ... can ruin the whole thing. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Another lesson came from the preschool experience. Previously the team bought seedlings/ plants for preschools, which in some cases were never planted. Now the team will not give plants to preschools unless the soil has been turned in preparation for planting. It was expected that people would feel better through the exercise of working outside in the garden and that they would also eat the produce from the garden. What was not expected was that gardening encouraged more social interaction with neighbours. People shared produce from their gardens with their neighbours. In some cases people had never spoken with their neighbours but through the desire to share produce from their gardens became friends and looked out for each other.


5 WHAINGAROA CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT

Location: Waikato

Duration: 1995�

Provider: Environment Waikato and Whaingaroa Environment (WE)

Purpose: to initiate an integrated catchment management process

Funding: seed funding from the Sustainable Management Fund, Ministry for the Environment

Fund-holding organisation: Environment Waikato

Evaluation: formative evaluation by Landcare Research

Current status: the WE group have incorporated and formed the Whaingaroa Environment Centre

Data used in analysis: interviews with three WE group members, and an official from Environment Waikato; project reports; evaluation report

Current status: the Whaingaroa Environment Centre is now in operation in central Raglan.

Figure 2: A tour of the Whaingaroa Catchment

Context

The Whaingaroa Environment group (known to many as WE) came into existence in March 1997, through a catchment management project facilitated by Environment Waikato and Landcare Research. Environment Waikato had secured funds in 1996 from the Ministry for the Environment�s Sustainable Management Fund to undertake a community-based environmental management project in the Whaingaroa catchment. The aim of this project was to undertake consultation with stakeholders in the catchment area in order to develop a catchment management plan.


The WE group formed as a result of the public consultation process that was facilitated by Landcare Research. WE operated as a networking group that supported the dissemination of information and ideas across environmental groups in the region. They held public meetings to raise awareness and facilitate agreement on a range of environmental issues. By 2002 the WE group had created an incorporated society and transformed to become the Whaingaroa Environment Centre. Environment Waikato had withdrawn from administering the funds for the group and the Whaingaroa Environment Centre had entered into a different funding contract (for environment centres) with the Ministry for the Environment. The Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project was initiated in the mid-1990s amid the development of the Ministry for the Environment�s Sustainable Land Management Strategy (1996). This strategy aims to enable land users and those who provide support and services to land users to work together more effectively. The strategy gives emphasis to regional management strategies and places significant responsibility for sustainable management on to land users. In the Waikato region the regional council (Environment Waikato) undertook to develop a number of local area management strategies. The Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project was aimed at developing the first of these. The strategies were initiated in the context of ongoing Treaty settlements which had implications for the role of Waikato iwi and hapü in resource management of the Whaingaroa Harbour. Simon Upton, then Minister for the Environment, was responsible for initiating this strategy. He was also the Member of Parliament for Raglan at that time, and in this role received a range of petitions for action to be taken with regard to the fish stock and water quality of Whaingaroa Harbour. Over a number of years mana whenua and tangata whenua from the area had been working to achieve official recognition of their roles as kaitiaki of the harbour. Residents were also raising concerns about the quality of the water and fish stock, and this was formalised with the establishment of the Whaingaroa Harbour Care group in 1995. At that time Landcare Research Ltd was looking at multi-stakeholder models of catchment management and had recruited staff who were experienced in the Atlantic Coastal Action Programme (ACAP), which focused on the Canadian maritime provinces. Environment Waikato had discussions with Landcare staff and were initially intending to use the Tairua Harbour as a test case for the ACAP model. This was because the area was data rich, i.e. there was plenty of previous research providing information about what was happening in the catchment. This evidence base was a prerequisite for using the ACAP model. The resource management issues were, however, not as well defined and after further discussions Environment Waikato chose Whaingaroa Harbour for the trial with the full understanding that part of the project would need to cover lack of information. In conjunction with the Sustainable Land Management Strategy, financial support for the creation of sustainable management projects was made available through the Sustainable Management Fund. It was in this context that officials from Environment Waikato, Waikato District Council, Landcare Research, NIWA, and the University of Waikato, with the support of the Whaingaroa ki te Whenua Trust, developed a proposal for a project to establish an integrated catchment management plan.


The original proposal was in two parts: • gather biophysical data in order to develop baseline measurements of the

environmental processes that impact on the harbour • undertake a community consultation process based on the ACAP, in order to produce

an integrated catchment management plan. In March 1996 the Sustainable Management Fund approved funding for the second part of the project only. ACAP was established in 1991 in eastern Canada, and was characterised by high levels of community and voluntary participation in the development and implementation of a comprehensive environmental management plan. At the time the proposal for the Whaingaroa project was being developed, two Canadians who had involvement with ACAP were working in New Zealand and an employee from Landcare Research had visited the programme in Canada (Kilvington 1998:9). The ACAP programme was identified as a useful model to guide the establishment of an integrated approach to catchment management. Key elements of the ACAP process were the establishment of a community-based non-profit organisation to manage the programme, funding of a paid co-ordinator, and stakeholder consultation to develop an environmental management plan.

Project practices

By mid-1996 Environment Waikato, as the lead agency for the project, had contracted Landcare Research �to facilitate the establishment of a group of community residents who reflected the views of numerous stakeholders within the catchment� (Kilvington 1998:12). The facilitation process Landcare Research used involved a series of �kitchen workshops�, whereby people met in locations of their choosing to discuss environmental issues of concern to them. This technique was designed to give the opportunity for people to discuss their concerns in a non-threatening environment and enabled the involvement of a broad range of people in this process. People were asked to raise concerns held about the health of the harbour and the catchment, and to identify what future involvement they might have in a project to address these. While facilitating the workshops, Landcare Research also undertook negotiations to facilitate iwi involvement with the project. This process of facilitating community discussion, awareness and organisation around issues of environmental concern culminated in a public information day, and an open meeting held in Te Uku Hall in March 1997.

In their methodology it was this kind of crux culmination when everything was meant to get pulled together and identify a shared vision and from that all the other bits of the plan were meant to fall out. That was the methodology as stated to the funding organisation, but it wasn�t entirely clearly communicated to the people in the community that that was the anticipated outcome. I think [the facilitator] was really trying to not anticipate what the community would want and not force anything on to anybody, which has a lot of merit obviously. But what it meant was that at that particular meeting the idea of having a plan, which was what the funding was for, wasn�t even mentioned, it wasn�t even offered as an option, so it wasn�t the first thing that came to people�s minds, they didn�t think, oh we must have a plan. (Interview � project member)


This public meeting was the final activity to be facilitated by Landcare Research personnel. The meeting called for interested individuals to form a group to progress the ideas gathered throughout the facilitated process:

There were some nice people there and I liked the fact that the council members were attending, various council officials and council members ... I think they suggested that we got together and decided what we wanted to be. (Interview � project member)

This group of volunteers began to meet regularly with the acknowledgement that they had been mandated by the meeting in Te Uku to be an information conduit. The group took on the name Whaingaroa Environment, or WE, and has convened many public meetings and produced quarterly newsletters to further raise awareness of issues in the catchment. In 1998 Landcare Research was again contracted by Environment Waikato to undertake an evaluation of the Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project. The requirement for evaluation had been set in the original funding agreement between Environment Waikato and the Sustainable Management Fund. The evaluation comprised two parts:

A review of the progress of the community project steering group, established through the Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project; and an assessment of the trial process (based on the North American Atlantic Coastal Action Programme) used in the Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project. (Kilvington 1998:5)

The evaluation undertaken by Landcare Research personnel had two functions: a formative evaluation to inform the future development of the project, and an impact evaluation to assess the results and effects of the project to date. The evaluation report states that a participatory �goal free� evaluation was undertaken in order to focus on what the participants of the project had experienced as opposed to evaluating the project against a set of predetermined, externally set objectives (Kilvington 1998:5). This involved a facilitated discussion with members of the WE group, which explored the group�s goals, criteria for success, achievements and difficulties, as well as proposals for how the group might operate in the future. In addition, interviews were undertaken with members of the main environmental management agencies operating in the area, plus key individuals who had been associated at some stage with the project. Project documents held by Environment Waikato and the Ministry for the Environment were also drawn on in the course of the evaluation. The evaluation report documented the history of the project and the evaluation method, and then provided an evaluation of the community project steering group based on the points raised in the meeting and interviews. This section of the report looked at the representation of the group, the group�s resources, achievements of the group, key relationships, the group�s contribution towards the anticipated project outcomes, success factors, the future of WE, and the strengths and weaknesses of the community project steering group. This was followed by an evaluation of the broader project process, which reviewed the initiation of the project, community facilitation processes, iwi involvement and agency involvement, and gave a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the project process.


The emphasis of the evaluation was on assessing the processes in order to inform the future development of the project. The evaluator�s role was developed after the project had been established. The person who took up this role had been involved with the project from the start so was familiar with the project members and practices. However, the evaluation was not designed as part of the ACAP process, so the evaluator had to develop her own ways of ensuring the information gathered was fed back into the project. The impetus for the evaluation had come from the requirements of the Sustainable Management Fund as part of the funding contract. The evaluation highlighted discordance between the objectives for the Catchment Management Project, as outlined in the funding agreement between Environment Waikato and the Sustainable Management Fund, and the objectives the WE group had established for their work. The evaluation process revealed that the WE group were not fully (if at all) cognisant of the broader project process and the contractual obligations of the work of the WE group (Kilvington 1998:27). The evaluation report indicated that while WE was successfully operating according to the mandate from the meeting in Te Uku, the group had not met the objective of creating a catchment management plan, which had been written into the funding agreement for the project. This had not been an objective established through the consultation meetings and thus was not an objective of the WE group (Kilvington 1998:27). Following the release of Landcare Research�s evaluation of the Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project, members of environmental organisations that the WE group were liaising with challenged the WE group about the work it was doing and why it had not produced a catchment management plan:

That report was picked up by some people in the community who hadn�t been involved up until then, who came along to the meeting ... and said �you failed, you didn�t make a plan�. Everybody was going �we didn�t know we were meant to have a plan�. (Interview � project member)

This challenge spurred a reassessment by the WE group of its mission and plans for the future. The group underwent an arduous process of developing a mission statement, as well as clear protocols for the work they undertook. It involved extensive discussion and resulted in the development of a stronger group identity and clarity of purpose:

They [the challengers] had a major impact on the mission statement ... we debated hard, hard, hard, meeting after meeting, communities and what that word meant ... what we thought we could offer, we were being prescriptive ... it was hard work ... that was maybe a second phase in the life of the organisation. (Interview � project member)

One of the decisions made at this time was to accommodate the requests for developing a catchment management plan while also furthering the growth of the WE group. In 1999 funding was obtained through Environment Waikato to contract researchers to develop a draft set of environmental guidelines, more commonly called the Catchment Management Plan, for Whaingaroa. Funding was also gained for a part-time co-ordinator position to undertake the administration and facilitation of the WE group. The fund-holding organisation took the perspective of not wanting to rush the process, but also kept the idea of a plan in the forefront as an important objective for the group to achieve. Their perspective on the process is highlighted in the statement below. It is important to note that for some members of the WE group the insistence on a plan appeared to be more of a directive from the fund-holding organisation than a commonly agreed goal:


I think that is one of the things when you�re working with communities, sometimes things don�t happen as quickly as you may think. They came around to the recognition that they needed a plan, not from anything we said or did, but because they were being asked from other elements of the community �well where is your plan, where are you going?�. Then they recognised that they needed one ... We also noticed that there was an amazing transformation within the community, a recognition of pulling together that perhaps wasn�t there to start with. (Interview � funder)

The researchers working on the plan undertook to:

• fill in the information gaps identified through earlier community consultation • summarise community concerns and aspirations • interpret the above into a draft plan for the future management of the catchment

(Stanway and Thorpe 2001:8). To do this the researchers:

• reviewed literature and data sets relating to the state of the catchment environment • reviewed community consultation records to identify concerns and aspirations • maintained dialogue with mana whenua, local residents, fishers and environmental

groups in the area • regularly reported on the progress of the research at WE meetings, other community

group meetings and through the WE newsletter (Stanway and Thorpe 2001:8). The researchers experienced a number of difficulties with drafting the plan. Some of these were to do with the limitations of the initial consultation phase of the Catchment Management Project, and others were to do with communicating the significance of looking at environmental management on a catchment scale (Stanway and Thorpe 2001:9−11). Draft versions of the plan and the additional research report were circulated to stakeholders for comment and subsequent changes made. The final plan was launched in November 2002. The final phase of the community action project was in 2002, when the WE group established the Whaingaroa Environment Centre as an incorporated society:

The authorities felt that we ought to incorporate, to handle money we needed to incorporate, to apply for grants on our own behalf and you can�t hold on too tightly. I remember feeling that, once you try to formalise it the whole thing would die. That argument wasn�t correct, but I don�t think it was wasted. (Interview � project member)

At this point Environment Waikato withdrew from administering the funding of the WE group. The Whaingaroa Environment Centre went through a period as a completely voluntary agency. Later in 2001 the Centre entered into a different funding contract with the Ministry for the Environment. They received grant funding for establishment and overheads but not for any staff, so the Centre continued operating voluntarily, including substantial voluntary work put in to complete the catchment management plan and its accompanying poster.


Relationships

The building of relationships with other community and environmental organisations has been a central feature of this project. Individuals from other environmental groups were also members of WE. There were direct challenges to WE from these groups, and these helped WE to identify its mission and form a strong identity. There were relationships of tension and also growing support. The strengthening of relationships and understanding between groups was reported to have influenced the wider cohesion in the community:

... a lot of people in Raglan are picking up on a change within our community, which in the past has been often prone to quite a lot of backstabbing and people running each other down, and that kind of pettiness. A lot of people in Raglan are picking up that it is not happening as much, particularly among environmental groups that they actually seem to be able to be co-operating on things, doing things together, talking to each other, tolerating each other, even writing each other letters of support for funding applications and things. Lots of people have noticed that and I actually think a lot of that came through that process that [was] facilitated of allowing those people to be heard, rather than just told to go away or shut up or whatever. Actually listening to their concerns, working through each of their concerns, word by word basically. Allowing them to challenge every single word that was in that [mission statement] and for the group to defend why it was there or not, to accommodate or to stand their ground, or whatever. I think that was a very healing process ... (Interview � project member)

The main link between WE and Environment Waikato was through the policy unit, which managed the Catchment Management Project, funding and employment of project employees. As the project developed, WE members also began work with other units of the council, and various council officials would also attend WE meetings. The WE group had a number of members linked into Environment Waikato as employees or elected representatives. The relationship with mana whenua and tangata whenua was a critical aspect in the formation of the project. The project�s relationship with mana whenua and tangata whenua was a constant challenge, a point of tension, reflection and learning:

We had a difficulty with the involvement of tangata whenua in the Raglan situation. We had initial positive buy-in, but in our attempt to be inclusive, and talk to everybody round the place, and it was not just the hapü, but we talked to marae based meetings, we talked to the Tainui representatives on the Trust Board and let them know what we were doing in the area ... their priority was the Waikato River ... In that respect we had tried to be inclusive, but we lost out and the marae decided to go and produce their own management plan ... I don�t know what we could have done differently ... we were just caught. (Interview � funder)

More recently a closer official working relationship has formed at hapü level and with members of the environmental management committee representing local marae. Today some hapü in the Whaingaroa catchment are working on hapü plans for their areas and more constructive dialogue between some of the hapü and Environment Centre has developed. Relationships with researchers are also a distinctive aspect of this project and have shaped a healthy wariness of research processes:

The other two Aucklanders who came down, I didn�t mind them at all, but boy they certainly stirred up a hornet�s nest with some people in Raglan, because they felt they took away our ideas. (Interview � project member)


Researchers were involved with the project from the start in the roles of evaluators and facilitators, and as part of the original funding consortium. Another set of researchers undertook an evaluation of the initial workshop phase of the project. The project continues to receive attention from researchers from various disciplines.

Lessons learnt

The original WE group put a lot of energy into developing project culture. These efforts came primarily in response to challenges made within the group, their own community and from external commentators. Using processes influenced by kaupapa Mäori enabled them to work through conflicts in the group. This process was also seen to help minimise the risk of losing the passion in the group when it became more formalised. All informants for the WE group spoke at length about the lessons they had learnt through the group about what it means to work with mana whenua and tangata whenua. A key lesson was learnt through imparting skills from one member about understanding people�s grievances, giving time for their concerns to be heard and then facilitating a process that accommodates recognition of people�s pain and moves towards a common vision. The WE group comprised highly skilled and knowledgeable people who are active in a range of other voluntary organisations. Respondents felt that having skilled people who took on the role of chairperson and stepped in from time to time to facilitate decision-making and vision processes enabled them to work through points of conflict. As a result the WE group was able to draw on knowledge of resources available through government and other community-based organisations, and could utilise strong networks for information and assistance. The Whaingaroa Environment Centre, which evolved from WE, has learnt to have a clear identity (formed out of the challenges of how best to create change � how to position themselves in terms of advocacy, activism and information sharing) and to frequently articulate this and reflect on it as challenges arise:

I see it when new people come into the group and they have some of the same questions and challenges and anybody in the group can communicate �well we actually don�t do that, this is what we do and this is why and this is just what we�re about�. Then you just move on so it doesn�t have to be re-litigated every time. We have an understanding of what we do and what we don�t do. (Interview � project member)

Key personalities were acknowledged as having a significant influence on the development of the present Environment Centre and the catchment management plan. The group has been able to draw on people�s experience and knowledge of best practice in order to formalise the organisation and to access funding for the Centre. Through this process lessons have been learnt about ensuring the continuity of the organisation, and the need to create clear delineations between the original WE group and its offspring. As an information-sharing group, the Environment Centre members have also had to learn how best to communicate environmental issues with the diverse range of people and organisations in their area. A significant challenge for some members was communicating the concept of catchment-based management. Today, members of the Environment Centre are learning how to work alongside − but separate from − tangata whenua processes for environmental management, and to do so with deference to tangata whenua process. This process of finding their own separate path has led the Centre members to a position where they are now encouraged to work more closely with tangata whenua through Tainui hapü ki Whaingaroa:


Maybe, like I say, Mäori are going to be the next players of [the Centre�s] existence, maybe we�ll fuse, or get subsumed or become a subgroup of one of the iwi discussion groups, who knows? I don�t think it matters really. What matters to me is that ... there is an environmental organisation that people feel they can come to as a friend, someone who will jumpstart their whole concern. (Interview � project member)

In a review of its local area management strategies work, Environment Waikato identified the following lessons it had learnt through the Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project. These came under the two broad headings of strategic lessons and operational lessons. The strategic lessons were factors Environment Waikato need to consider in its strategic development. The evaluation stated:

Staff identified that an organisation-wide understanding of the implications of this approach compared to other approaches for implementing policy at a sub-regional level is needed. The LAMS [local area management strategies] approach is based on a more participative rather than the consultative approach such as that usually undertaken in the development of statutory plans, for example the Regional Policy Statement. This means that the communities have been more actively involved in the setting of objectives and actions, as well as the preparation and writing of the strategy. This emphasis on community participation and involvement in addressing environmental issues has decision making and resourcing implications that need to be carefully considered, understood and agreed to at a political level. (Environment Waikato 2001)

The implications of this community participation approach were identified as follows (Environment Waikato 2001 [no page numbers]).

• Community expectation versus ability to deliver:

Limitations of the organisation need to be clearly expressed at the outset in order to minimise disappointment and mistrust. Also the Council needs to assess beforehand if it does have the capacity to enter into a participatory approach � to think through impacts of council decision-making processes and legal obligation as well as preparedness of decision makers to commit to the implementation of the communities aspirations.

• Buying-in to uncertain outcomes: There seems little point in empowering communities to prepare strategies if the decision making power to action them is then denied. This has quite serious ramifications for political decision making. It may not sit comfortably with the traditional decision making regime of local government, which is based on the premise that the elected representative will ultimately make the decision taking into account the best interests of the wider community.

• Integrated management and Resource Management Act 1991 functions:

... EW may need to step outside of its so called core functions and participate with agencies in non-core activities to achieve the overall outcomes of the strategy ... Environment Waikato therefore cannot always direct the time and timing of the process.


• Efficiency versus effectiveness: The community driven process may not appear to be the most efficient way of producing a strategy in the short-term, ie, as cheap, fast and technically proficient as a �professional planner� might write it. However, it was recognised that despite this, community ownership and buy-in up front is likely to make the process cheaper, easier and more effective (in terms of achieving environmental outcomes) in the long term. This is because the strategy has a much better chance of being implemented if it is backed by the community.

• Time and timing:

A long-term commitment is required for working with the community and with it a commitment to taking the time needed to work with them � recognising that this may not fit with election cycles or other working programmes of the council.

• Relationship and involvement with tangata whenua:

The multi-stakeholder approach to community participation whereby all stakeholders are seen to have equal status does not meet the needs of tangata whenua. EW needs to recognise that alternative parallel processes are required for working with tangata whenua.

Current status

There is considerable local disappointment in Whaingaroa that the catchment management plan has no statutory teeth, and the hearings committee response to a recent submission on proposed SH 23 major realignment by the Whaingaroa Environment Centre, based on catchment plan principles, demonstrated this. The light at the end of the tunnel is the new Local Government Act and the opportunity to transform the catchment management plan into �a community plan� under it. At present it is not known how the new regional and district councils� obligations will be fulfilled.


6 HE RANGIHOU NEW DAY PROJECT (OF OPOTIKI SAFER COMMUNITIES COUNCIL)

Location: Opotiki district and Waimana Duration: 1998�

Provider: Opotiki District Council, for Opotiki Safer Communities Council

Purpose: to reduce alcohol and other drug-related harm to youth, by strengthening community action on youth and drugs

Funder: Ministry of Education (1998−2000), Crime Prevention Unit (part of 2000), Ministry of Health (2001− present)


Evaluation: formative evaluation by ALAC; impact evaluation as part of the Drug Education Development Project by the Centre for Family Policy Research and the Injury Prevention Research Centre of Auckland University

Documents used in analysis: interview with project manager; interview with formative evaluator; milestone funding reports; journal article; impact evaluation report

Current status: ongoing but may end October 2003 due to changes to umbrella organisation.

Figure 3: A project celebration held at a local marae


Context

In 1997 there was a significant escalation in drug-related school suspensions throughout New Zealand, which received considerable media attention. Low-decile schools in certain regions and Mäori students were over-represented in these drug suspensions (Conway, Megan et al 2000). The impetus for providing specific resources to a targeted drug education project arose in the context of pressure on government politicians (the Prime Minister, in particular) from community organisations, including Rotary New Zealand, who were concerned about the number of school drug suspensions, as well as the recognition by the Ministry of Education that until the National Health Education curriculum was fully developed there was a vacuum in the delivery of effective drug education. As a result, the Ministry of Education made available two phases of funding through the Drug Education Development Project (DEDP). Phase One was a contestable pool of funding for demonstration project initiatives to address issues of drug use and suspensions among school students in the priority areas where suspensions were the highest. Phase Two was a small grant system that could be accessed by all schools for drug initiatives. Through Phase One, the DEDP contracted four providers of alcohol and drug education to develop programmes in schools and/or local communities in five defined target areas across the country (Adair et al 2000:9). The Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit (APHRU) and its Mäori health research partner, Whäriki, at the University of Auckland, were approached by the Ministry of Education to tender for DEDP funding. A proposal was developed and funded, which planned to initiate a co-ordinated community action approach to tackle the issues identified by the Ministry of Education. This saw the development of the Community Action on Youth and Drugs project (CAYAD), a collaborative partnership between five community action projects located in Northland (two projects), Waitakere, Opotiki and Nelson. The aim of these projects was to reduce drug-related harm among students by strengthening community action to reduce drug-related issues (Adair et al 2000:9). Objectives developed at the onset between the researchers and community partners focused on:

• increasing informed debate on drug issues and their impact on schools and the community

• promoting, implementing and supporting policies and safe behaviours on drug use • identifying existing and/or developing �best practice� programmes to address schools

and students needs, including youth/whänau in need of support • developing alliances between key community organisations and sectors • developing local resources to raise awareness and facilitate and support youth voice

and discussion on reducing drug-related harm (Conway, Tunks et al 2000).

The CAYAD project officially ended in June 2000 with the exhaustion of the one-off funding from the Ministry of Education. Opotiki district, which extends up the east coast of the Bay of Plenty, has a rural population predominantly made up of underemployed and low-income Mäori. The Whakatohea area continues to feel the impact of historical land confiscation (raupatu) grievances. The Opotiki district is also renowned for its cannabis plantations.


At the time the Ministry of Education funding became available, the Opotiki Safer Communities Council had already decided to develop a project addressing youth drug issues in a holistic fashion involving families/whänau and local communities as well as the youth themselves. There was local interest in this approach after a key alcohol and drug worker doing drug education in a school had held complementary education sessions on the marae with members of the students� whänau.

History

He Rangihou New Day Project began in 1998 as part of the wider CAYAD initiative. The philosophy central to the project is as follows.

• While it is important to work in schools on youth drug issues, this must be supported with changes to the wider environments of young people.

• A range of complementary strategies should be used, involving youth and their families/whänau, hapü, marae, churches and local communities; and government and community agencies, policy and legislation, and the media.

• Drug issues are usually a symptom of wider problems, and should be placed in a context of personal, family/whänau, hapü and community development.

• A bicultural/bilingual and Mäori-focused approach should be taken wherever appropriate in working with Mäori youth and their whänau.

• A harm education rather than prohibitionist approach is usually more effective in working with problems related to alcohol and other drugs.

• Local solutions work best for local problems. (Opotiki Safer Communities Council 2001)

A key aim of the project is to support parents, families/whänau and local communities to take long-term responsibility for youth drug issues. Another is to increase awareness of �positive alternatives to drug dominated lifestyles� among young people and the adults who most influence them (Opotiki Safer Communities Council 2001). He Rangihou New Day Project was developed under the umbrella of the Opotiki Safer Communities Council, with the safer community co-ordinator taking on the role of project director (later manager). The project was scoped by consulting a range of local stakeholders working with youth drug issues, including schools, community and iwi organisations, government agencies, and the health sector. The first phase of the project was the appointment of a project advisory team and community development worker. This took several months because of community consultation processes, but the process of involving key stakeholders from the start was recognised as being a strong building block for creating community ownership of the project:

We were very slow in going through all those initial stages but I think in the scheme of things it has really paid off. We used a community selection process for the community development worker. The main contenders were interviewed in the usual way, but then they had to make a presentation to a group of key people working with youth drug issues, on how they would approach the job. This meant we could all see the interviewees in action, doing a presentation and relating to a diverse group of people ... and it also meant some key people who they would be working with had a say in who got the job. We got what has turned out to be a very successful appointee, with community support for the appointment. (Interview � project co-ordinator)


With the appointment in June 1998 of the community development worker and the establishment of an interim steering group, the project began to build momentum. APHRU had established a formative evaluation team to provide overall co-ordination of the CAYAD project and to work with each of the different project areas such as Opotiki on planning and critically reviewing local activities based on the project objectives. The role of the formative evaluators was also to resource the projects with international and national drug-related information for evidence-based decision-making:

I was totally unfamiliar with the concept of formative evaluation before this project ... The APHRU evaluators were able to provide us with international research information and ideas for our work. Without them we would never have set the project up in such a way, with that degree of scrutiny of our process and awareness of the literature and national policy. We would have dealt with the project in a much more low key way. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

In June 2000 the Ministry of Education�s funding for all CAYAD projects ceased and the Safer Community Council financed He Rangihou New Day Project on a short-term basis until additional funding was sourced. In January 2001 the Ministry of Health began funding the project for a further three years. With the change from education to health funding, and the evolutionary process of the community development project, work in schools has decreased considerably and there is now a primary focus on community-based activities. As time goes by the project works more with adults who most influence youth drug use and less with activities specifically for youth. The main activity is a holistic drug education and motivation programme, which places drugs in a broad context of personal, family/whänau, cultural, spiritual, social, political and historical issues. This is complemented by a variety of innovative health promotion activities, capacity building such as community worker training, Mäori-focused initiatives, policy consultation, community awareness raising and debate, and alliance building between organisations and networks working with youth drug issues. Activities are bicultural and bilingual, or Mäori-focused when appropriate. They take place in communities throughout the district, sometimes in isolated locations where there are no roads or electricity:

Our most significant work in the last year has been the community development worker going out into grassroots Mäori networks in rural areas and doing his education and motivational work with groups of hard-core �bros� and whänau members and young parents. He is reaching people who I doubt have ever been reached by anything like this before and to me that is the real work in making long-term change with youth drug issues in a district like ours. It�s taken a long, long time to reach these grassroots networks ...a huge amount of word of mouth publicity and trust building and relationship building, and waiting for people�s circumstances to be right. Real change takes time and it�s taken us years ... (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Management of the project

Because the project is under the umbrella of the Opotiki Safer Communities Council (SCC) it is directly accountable to the SCC and SCC funders Opotiki District Council and the Crime Prevention Unit of the Ministry of Justice , as well as the funder of the project itself, the Ministry of Health (previously the Ministry of Education). Reporting and evaluation for the first three years was organised through APHRU in its formative evaluation role. Milestone reporting has been used throughout to report on how the project is meeting its objectives. Reflection occurs at SCC meetings, through the informal dialogue process the project workers have established between themselves, and through the report writing process. In


addition, the project workers have made presentations about the project to a wide range of conferences, workshops, and hui, which has provided opportunities for them to reflect upon and analyse their work.

We (the Community Development Worker and I) have this ongoing dialogue ... we are constantly analysing our situation and activities as we are going along. When we are preparing for something, whether it is a conference presentation, a six monthly milestone report or an annual business plan, we take stock and say where we are up to, what�s working and not working, what shall we do next? (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Relationships

Fundamental to the inclusion of He Rangihou New Day Project in the wider CAYAD project was the existence of personal and collegial relationships between staff at APHRU and the project manager. It was the prior knowledge of each other�s skills and interests that led to the successful formulation of a community action project. It was also the awareness of specific Ministry of Education staff of APHRU�s history of undertaking successful community action work in the field of alcohol and drugs that led to their being invited to tender for the DEDP funding. A significant feature of the relationship between the project workers and APHRU researchers was the affirmation and credibility the researchers were able to give to the work of the project, and their assistance in helping the project workers report what they were doing in a meaningful way to the funding organisation:

APHRU�s gift has been encouraging us to develop innovative activities and ways of working, particularly with Mäori ... affirming us in finding our unique local solutions. They have encouraged us to take the learnings from our project out to conferences and workshops and hui, often in joint presentations with them, which has been very strengthening. They have given me the confidence to be more honest and assertive about the realities of community development processes when we report to funders or go out into the wider world ... to say �we haven�t done this thing we planned for these reasons� and �we�re working this way for these reasons� ... Our experience of working with APHRU has been enormously positive ... Philosophically we�ve agreed about key issues, such as social change and harm reduction approaches to dealing with youth drug issues, and working appropriately with Mäori ... I�m profoundly grateful. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Another relationship central to this project is that between the project manager and the community development worker. As paid workers for this project, and as a Mäori and Pākehā team, the way this relationship has developed has had a significant impact on the work of the project:

The communication between us is really important, particularly as a Pakeha woman manager and a Mäori male field worker working mainly with Mäori communities. It�s important to keep the discussion going because we come from such totally different perspectives, lifestyles, situations in society ... and our roles in the project are so different. [The community development worker] does the hands-on work like education and community development advice, particularly with Mäori, and I deal more with the mainstream side like funding and writing submissions and liaising with government agencies. We cover a lot of bases between us, in the places we reach and the work we do, and we need to keep discussing them. (Interview � project co-ordinator)


He Rangihou New Day Project works with and alongside a range of community, iwi and government organisations in its area and maintains working links with a few schools. Relationships with grassroots Mäori communities increasingly are a significant feature of the project. These are based on strong one-on-one relationships, which the community development worker has built and maintained over several years with �movers and shakers� in various whänau, hapü and community networks throughout the project area:

Since the project started my idea of �community� networking has really changed. At first our key networks were mainly mainstream ones like social services organisations and schools in town, which are easy to contact. Now many of the project�s main relationships are with key people in grassroots Mäori communities in rural areas, who are much harder for the mainstream to reach. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

He Rangihou New Day Project workers have a wealth of regional, national and international relationships which provide for the exchange of information, ideas, advice and support. The project built strong links with the other CAYAD projects, and these continue to varying degrees. There is ongoing contact with networks of colleagues working in fields such as alcohol and other drugs, youth development, Mäori development, Pākehā implementation of the Treaty of Waitangi, community development, health promotion, and community safety. Through exchange visits and international conferences, the project has developed useful relationships with indigenous people in Australia, Canada and the United States.

Lessons learnt

A difficulty He Rangihou New Day Project faced in its early years was the expectations of its initial co-funder, the Ministry of Education. The Ministry funded the project as part of the CAYAD initiative to involve both schools and their wider communities in a co-ordinated community action approach to reducing drug-related harm to youth. The need for this approach had been identified locally, and it was consistent with international evidence that strategies aimed at changing individual behaviour such as school drug education programmes are ineffective by themselves. Funding community action was a bold step for the classroom-focused Ministry of Education. It seemed to struggle to understand how some of He Rangihou New Day Project�s holistic activities to improve the wellbeing of families/whänau and communities, particularly those aimed at Mäori, were relevant to student drug issues. The evaluator played an important role in enabling a process of translation and even legitimation to occur between the project and the funding agency. The project philosophy fits more comfortably with the expectations of its current funder, the Ministry of Health. Its holistic bicultural approach, including activities aimed at social change and decolonisation, is consistent with the Ministry of Health�s determinants of health and other policies. While the project has achieved some effective and groundbreaking work with schools, overall it has difficulty working with Mäori concepts and practices in structured school environments. It has found that Mäori principals and boards of trustees are usually far more open that others to innovative bicultural and Mäori-focused activities for students and teachers, both at the school and in the community. In facilitating school−community dialogue on student behaviour, the project has been frustrated at the reluctance of some schools to take risks and seriously consider the suggestions of whänau and people from the community.


Increasingly the project has moved its focus of reducing drug-related harm to Mäori youth from schools to homes. To reach parents and other influential adult role models it develops relationships with �movers and shakers� in grassroots communities. In particular, it looks for those �on the turn� who want to strengthen their cultural identity and make positive changes in their lives. In working with whänau, hapü and grassroots communities the project has found it essential to understand and work with the multiple perspectives and complex dynamics involved. It has been important to know, for example, the characteristics of specific hapü or the differences in world view between ahi kā (the people who have kept the fires going at home) and others returning from living elsewhere. The project has found that the realities of community action and community development processes sometimes do not fit well with the annual business planning required by some funders. Some of the most effective activities have been unplanned, with the project workers seizing the moment when community circumstances were suddenly right, or supporting the next obvious step from a previous activity. Some of its planned activities have turned out not to be viable after initial work, or to require a longer timeframe than anticipated because of community circumstances outside the project�s control. In grassroots Mäori communities, in particular, the project has found concepts of time and planning very different from those expressed in funding contracts. He Rangihou New Day Project struggles to measure and explain the short-term impacts of its work, particularly to those in local Pākehā communities who are not knowledgeable about the complexity of drug-related issues for Mäori youth or sympathetic to Mäori aspirations. The project chooses not to give its activities a high profile in the local media, to keep faith with grassroots groups who do not want such publicity and to avoid demeaning media labels such as �at risk� youth and families. Because the project is working for longer-term change, it has difficulty producing immediate quantitative evidence that its strategies are effective, such as reductions in statistics for school suspensions and crime. Consequently, He Rangihou New Day Project has been at risk of being closed down by some local body politicians. They argue that the work is ineffective, social issues are the responsibility of central government, and Opotiki District Council should not be spending ratepayers� money on sponsorship of the project�s umbrella organisation, the Opotiki Safer Communities Council.


7 ROUGH CUT YOUTH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Location: Westport, Buller Region

Duration: 1999−2002

Provider: Buller Rural Education Activities Programme (REAP)

Purpose: to respond to concerns for at-risk youth through the medium of film-making

Funder: Department of Internal Affairs (DIA), Youth Development Fund, Work and Income NZ

Fund-holding organisation: n/a Evaluation: process/ impact

Data used in analysis: interviews with co-ordinator of the Rough Cut Youth Development Project and three tutors, REAP CEO and worker, previous REAP CEO, two funders and the DIA evaluator; REAP/Rough Cut Youth Development Project reports and videos; DIA evaluation report; media reports

Current status: the project is on hold while members seek new sources of funding.

Figure 4: Celebrating the Rough Cut film screening

Context

The Rough Cut Youth Development Project is a three-year capped project with a focus on youth suicide, funded until recently by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) through its Community Based Youth Development funding scheme, with additional funding from Work and Income New Zealand. It was developed as a response to a concern for the wellbeing of young people in the Buller area. The Buller is one of New Zealand�s most geographically isolated and socially disadvantaged areas. Educational resources, employment and transport are key issues for the region. Depression, loss of hope, low self-esteem and lack of motivation are serious concerns for some young people.


The concept that led to the creation of the Rough Cut Project was developed by a community group on the West Coast in conjunction with a DIA community advisor. In 1999, with the withdrawal of the original co-ordinating community group, Buller Rural Education Activities Programme (REAP) in Westport stepped in as an umbrella organisation for the project. Initially the funding was offered to REAP as a coast-wide (Karamea to Haast) project. REAP refused this, regarding it as an impossible, hugely under-funded project. They picked it up as a Buller-based project, albeit with reduced funding. This funding shortfall has been a constant tension for the project and an additional challenge for REAP, which has had to generate additional funding. Buller REAP is an incorporated society, formed in 1991. It provides educational programmes and support to individuals, families and organisations in the Buller area. As the umbrella organisation for the Rough Cut Project, Buller REAP was responsible for employing a co-ordinator and for managing funding requirements. This role expanded over the course of the Rough Cut Project as needs for administrative and mentoring assistance were identified. Based in Westport, the Rough Cut Project uses the services of a variety of film professionals, both local and national, to produce a 12-week film course every year. This course is primarily for young people, but it offers five places for those over 25 to ensure a balance of skills and maturity and to optimise group dynamics. Participants (�Rough Cutters�) develop the considerable range of skills that are essential to the film industry, but, more importantly, explore issues that may be acting as a barrier to their life progress and achievement of wellbeing. As one of the tutors noted, �it may be as simple as giving kids a reason to get out of bed�. The project also gave young people opportunities for social interaction and co-operative work. �The main benefit for all participants was [participants�] exposure to possibilities� (tutor feedback comments). Film-making is regarded as a �hook�, attracting participants who would otherwise be overlooked. More importantly it is a vehicle for personal healing and the development of self-esteem, confidence, leadership and organisational skills.

I don�t know what your chances are of getting work in the industry as we call it, but it�s always struck me as being a really good training ground for life in a broad sense because the process of film making or video making, it�s almost always a group effort, it requires good communication, not just because it�s a key communication medium, but because to get it to happen, [there is] a lot of communication involved and it�s always struck me that the people who go through courses like that are going to learn social skills and communication skills that might not lead directly to a job but it sure as hell is going to boost their self-esteem, because I�ve seen it happening and it�s intrigued me that someone came up with it as an idea to combat youth suicide as opposed to training people for a job. (Interview � project member)

It is a suicide prevention project that does not overtly target those at risk but links with local agencies who refer potential candidates. Criteria include social disadvantage, low socioeconomic status, family adversity and dysfunction, mental health issues, drug and alcohol problems, and adverse and stressful life events. As a result of this project, community networks are strengthened and the wider community is connected to the project with the presentation of all the individual film projects at the end of the course.


Project practices

The project has had a number of changes in management since it began. Someone from the area was initially employed by REAP to develop the framework for the project and to ensure the concept got off the ground. An advisory committee was established, comprising local people with an interest in the project as well as people from outside the region with specialist film skills. The previous Buller REAP manager also played an instrumental role in the formation of the project, putting in time and effort that far exceeded her official role. Additional funding from Work and Income New Zealand was also secured at this stage, which covered the cost of some of the materials. The co-ordination of the project required long hours with limited resources, and the work was emotionally demanding. After the first co-ordinator withdrew from the position, a new co-ordinator was employed following commencement of the first course, and this person has continued in that role. This has been a challenging position due to a range of issues. In the third year of the project, when the Rough Cut Project�s funding position became acute and the function of the advisory group and management structures seemed unclear, REAP disbanded the advisory group. There are differing opinions as to the wisdom of this move, with community members and project participants tending to see the group as having an essential role in the development of the project. Others viewed the group as superfluous, with a limited understanding of community development principles and the wider issues associated with the project. However, the lack of initial planning and resourcing may well have influenced the way the advisory group developed and there were limited training options available for the members. The REAP manager took on some of the functions of the committee by mentoring the project co-ordinator and overseeing the project while funding opportunities were explored. Changes in the organisation of the project reflected attempts to address a number of concerns that were identified over the course of the project. Continuity for the young people involved was one significant issue. The project was seen to raise young people�s hopes and dreams about their lives, but with nothing material in place to support the development of these aspirations once the participants leave. The project staff were wary of setting the participants up for disappointment after the course finished, although some of the tutors and ex-participants of the project were attempting to establish employment opportunities on the Coast in order to be able to employ skilled participants from the Rough Cut Project. A second concern was that the needs of the participants were a lot higher than the capacity of the project to respond. Having identified this, a counsellor was appointed to work alongside the co-ordinator. This person was able to offer counselling support to the participants and supervisory support to the co-ordinator. The project co-ordinator, with the support of the Buller REAP manager, has submitted annual reports to the DIA regarding the progress of the project. The project was also evaluated in 2002 as part of an evaluation of the overall DIA community-based youth development funding scheme using Crime Prevention Unit evaluation frameworks (Department of Internal Affairs. 2002). The evaluation was planned as a participatory project, with those involved in the project contributing to the design and implementation and using videos and observation. Funding was not specifically allocated for an evaluation and the REAP co-ordinator and a tutor made a significant contribution, including speaking to participants and making a video.


Being an internal DIA evaluation meant that the evaluator was seen by the project as the face of the funder and there were unrealistic expectations that the evaluator might be an advocate for the project. Some challenged the value of an evaluation coming from within the DIA. However, the evaluation and these reports have helped to document the development of the project and identify areas for improvement. The first report assisted the new chief executive officer of Buller REAP to understand the project as part of his orientation. A further process of reflection occurred through the co-ordinator�s practice of diary writing, whereby she documented and reviewed her work, the progress of the participants and the functioning of the project. This was an important source of information, which the project staff drew on as they reviewed and revised the course.

Relationships

The relationship between Rough Cut Project workers and Buller REAP as its umbrella organisation is central to this project. REAP is also instrumental in mediating relationships with funders and other community organisations in the area. A positive relationship was built with the school that offered the project the use of one of their buildings. The project�s relationships with Mäori are primarily on an individual basis, although there is some liaison with the Mäori Women�s Welfare League. Spin-offs for the community tended to be incidental rather than strategic, and issues were dealt with as they arose. Community networks were randomly established through the activities of the project, which encouraged students to engage public interest through police, museums, shopkeepers, the council and other members of the community as well as in the final presentation of students� work rather than as an active part of development of the project and its ongoing sustainability. Ongoing strengths of the project are evident. One informant suggested that the project was a catalyst for current filming in the area through the building of capacity and �a state of readiness�. Another felt there was:

... an enormous pride and interest in Buller towards Rough Cut because it was a successful local course. If the young people are interested and happy so are their families. (Interview � project member)

Another commented on the development of a previously non-existent �youth culture� in the area. The co-ordinator noted that:

It�s sort of creating a voice for the West Coast as well ... I think that is something that isn�t clear to an outsider, is the unpacking of the impact ... you�ve got to go and get this equipment and you�ve got to do that with them and do this, the skills of actually going into the community and talking to people, making lists ... (Interview � project member)

All those involved in the project are closely associated with each other through the film industry. They are also strongly linked to the Coast, although not all reside there. The expertise essential for the development of the project was accessed from these networks.


Lessons learnt

A key learning for the project members interviewed was the realisation that having passion for the project and a place to run it are not enough. Core community work skills were identified as being required to effectively develop and manage the project. As one informant noted, an overview or �eagle eye� that can see beyond the film focus is necessary. Additional components, such as a good understanding of community development processes and effective management structures, are also important. The change in management was an unexpected disruption:

... when someone else comes in and they have to feel it all out, it�s just obviously gonna go through, it seemed like when it was just sort of getting on its feet it then lost its feet again. (Interview � project member)

The disestablishment of the advisory committee was acknowledged by many to be a false economy and their guidance and support were missed. Project members asserted that refusing the original offer of funding from DIA for a Coast-wide project was a wise decision. Their experience of the project confirmed that it would not have been feasible to have tried to meet the needs of the wider Coast area. The project members reported that the funding that was eventually accepted was insufficient, and was thought to be no more than a third of what was actually required. This funding was tagged, and members expressed frustration that this did not allow for the development of the project or an appropriately funded formative evaluation. The project members expressed concern that this funding shortfall resulted in their being faced with unrealistic expectations from DIA about what the project could achieve. They argued that this was confounded by a lack of guidance and practical support from DIA, and that there were no processes in place to manage the turnover of key people. Changes to both the co-ordinator and manager positions of REAP were significant in the development of the Rough Cut Project, and the impact of these changes was not adequately addressed at the time. The importance of REAP to the project was also underestimated. Adequate planning time prior to the start of the project would have helped to create clear boundaries and would have enabled the project to structure the course within the funding constraints. Strategic planning and a clarification of the roles and responsibilities of those involved, management and governance structures with regular assessment were identified as gaps:

There needs to be more work done at the front end all the time, cementing a relationship, getting clarity, doing project planning. The first six months of any of these three-year programmes or projects should always be about that creating clarity of design ... that�s before you even begin to work with clients. We lost an opportunity, both organisations lost an opportunity on that level ... in fact one of our non-negotiables going into the next project was that we�re going to have a minimum of two meetings to design the three years of the new one ... We realised that we�d missed that real opportunity of setting it up and that means that ... if I leave or someone else leaves, there is a track record. The project could go on, the decisions could be made. So you could read it and say oh I know how it links because here is the synopsis, here is the project plan, this is where we are at, here are the changes, and here are the negotiated discussions. (Interview � project member)


So the role of Buller REAP as the umbrella organisation and its relationship to the project was an important factor that was overlooked and subsequently developed alongside the project. With the support of an umbrella group such as Buller REAP providing expertise and guidance and training for the advisory group and co-ordinator, the required planning could have been completed. Overall, there was a need to develop organisational procedures for dealing with various levels of risk and issues of safety inherent in the project, such as the follow-up of participants. Informants noted that the project needed to be considered more broadly in terms of its relationship to other community projects in the area and what the impact of the project would be on the Buller community over time. The expectations of the funder also needed clarification at the beginning of the project and measures taken to ensure all parties understood the terms of the funding, as well as developing strategies for establishing continuity of funding:

... improved clarity means reduced expectations which lets us be clearer with tutors, with people who are employing [members of] the community. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

Opportunities for advice and support from the funding organisation should have been available and the limitations of each organisation acknowledged from the outset. There was also a need to think through and discuss with funders how to ensure a broader community understanding of the nature of their funding relationship, in order to protect the reputation of Buller REAP in the face of disappointment expressed by the community when the project was no longer funded. Informants suggested that there is a need for wrap-up funding to enable a clean and positive conclusion to the project. Despite the constraints, the Rough Cut Project is considered by its members to be a highly successful project that unfortunately was unable to secure ongoing funding, and the course has not been repeated in 2003. However, the co-ordinator and REAP have been developing a new initiative, which has grown out of the Rough Cut Project and is also associated with film-making. This new project might offer some employment to Rough Cutters. In addition, the project members have focused on following up some of the participants who needed additional support.


8 CHRISTCHURCH YOUTH PROJECT

Location: Christchurch

Duration: 1997−

Provider: Christchurch City Council and Christchurch Police Purpose: Crime and violence prevention and support of young people Funder: Christchurch City Council and Christchurch Police

Fund-holding organisation: n/a Evaluation: process/impact

Data used in analysis: interviews with council co-ordinator, police co-ordinator, project co-ordinator, one youth worker and the evaluator; evaluation reports 1998, 2000; progress report 2001

Current status: ongoing and building new relationship with a Pacific trust.

Context

The Christchurch Youth Project developed out of a need expressed by some young people for a service that would assist young people under stress, and address public concern at the levels of offending and violence in the inner city. It is a partnership between the Christchurch City Council and Christchurch Police. The primary objective for the project has remained unchanged since it began in late 1997. The project aims to decrease youth violence and offending throughout the city, make Christchurch a safer place, increase positive opportunities available to young people, and improve co-ordination between groups involved with youth at risk. It is linked to the courts, and youth workers take young people home or get the police to arrest young people who are outside their curfew, after a warning. However, youth workers also develop relationships with young people and their families so they can involve families and support young people to change. Safer Communities was the original funder of this project, together with the City Council.

Project practices

The project is co-managed by the youth advocate for Christchurch City Council and the Police youth aid co-ordinator. The project also has a Police youth liaison officer, who provides the day-to-day co-ordination of the project, actively supporting the youth workers through supervision and involvement in street patrols alongside his other police duties. The Council provide salaries for three full-time youth workers, and the Police provide the co-ordinator. The project was initiated in February 1997. Originally the Police funded the employment of three youth workers, who worked Monday to Thursday with a community agency, providing services to the most marginalised youth clients. The youth workers then worked on Friday night doing street patrols with the Police. The Council supported the project as part of a collective with community agencies.


After being in existence for a year, the project was restructured in 1998. This restructuring was primarily in response to concerns heard by councillors about the work of the youth workers and the difficulties they expressed of straddling two very different cultures − community agencies and the Police. Concerns had been raised about the large membership (approximately 20 people from various youth-focused agencies) of this project team and the fact that it was not functioning constructively. Some considered there was a lack of protocols, systems and accountability frameworks with so many agencies involved. Council members and staff reached an agreement with the Christchurch Police to redesign the project, and a new employment and management structure was developed. This resulted in the Council dissolving the management team that had originally been established to oversee the project and withdrawing funding from the agencies. The process of dissolving the management team and withdrawing funding resulted in tense relationships across the agencies involved, the Police and the Council. This tension remains as a background factor to the continued operation of the project. The biggest challenge for other community youth workers was the role of the Police, and this concern does occasionally surface. However, one of the co-ordinators felt that all agencies now work together very positively. Two of the youth workers have since been appointed to the youth workers collective management team and in these positions provide a positive link between the collective and the Christchurch Youth Project. The project has been evaluated twice − before and after the structural changes − and a progress report was completed in 2002. These evaluations have been focused on outcomes rather than being formative. This was the preferred framework for the funders. The strength of the project lies in Police commitment, the Council setting up some strong management and review structures, and the calibre of the youth workers. Each youth worker meets with the project co-ordinator in the morning and the team meet every month. Every six months a review and planning day is held. Each youth worker also receives monthly external supervision from a person of his or her choice. The youth workers are well supported as Council employees, with access to training and other resources. It is a project that runs very smoothly and is structured rather than developmental.

Relationships

The challenges facing this project revolved around relationships. The Police perspective has been influential in the development of the project, with members often taking a reactive and solution-orientated response. The messy parts of a project�s development and the need at times to sit with the �terrible fuzziness� was not an easy process for the Police, who preferred to see substantive progress in a relatively short time. It was evident that the roles of all those involved at the start of the project and lines of communication were not clearly defined. However, despite these constraints the work is important and the project is regarded as very successful and effective, with some excellent outcomes. The Police co-ordinator acknowledges that it has been a challenging process and that his attitudes have changed over time with an increasing understanding of the work. Given this development in understanding, one informant suggested that if the Council and Police were to do things over again they might now respond differently.


The project�s community connections are diverse and the youth workers are well known within the central business district. One youth worker is on the Youth and Cultural Development Trust, and one of the project co-ordinators identified strong relationships with individual agencies, government departments, central city businesses and service providers such as the Bus Xchange. The project is connected to the Courts and Youth Aid section of the Police and its objectives are very clear. A protocol was put in place making all clients aware that the youth workers work with the Police and will report any offending brought to their notice. There was recognition that the youth workers are unable to work successfully with young people who are not ready for change, and as a result the focus of the project has moved away from the most extreme cases. However, these more challenging young people were still included occasionally, but only after a great deal of thought regarding the implications of their acceptance. Other relationships that supported this project are with schools through the school counsellors, and with other government agencies, particularly Child Youth and Family through involvement in family group conferences.

Lessons learnt

The withdrawal of the Council and Police from a shared management arrangement with community groups and the restructuring of the project was a pivotal point in the project�s development, with ongoing ramifications for relationships between the project and the community. The relationship between the Christchurch Youth Project and the youth workers� collective is improving but requires attentive management. As the project co-ordinator noted, the experience was �sobering�:

... firsthand hearing the comments in public, in a public forum, criticising some actions of the Police, of how the Police dealt with, not of the project, but how the Police dealt with some situations and being a Police Officer myself, [I] felt [I had] ... to stand up. (Interview � project member)

The willingness of the project co-ordinator to be open to these public challenges and resolve them as they arose and the appointment of one of the youth workers to the collective have contributed to improved relationships. The key lessons identified by the informants were primarily associated with building the strong relationship that exists between the Council and the Police since the restructuring. Finding a way of working with this sort of project has been a learning curve for all parties. The project provides an interesting example of the development of a relationship between two quite different agencies. Changes to staff have been difficult for the team, but adjustments have been made and the project is in a period of consolidation. The tight focus of the Christchurch Youth Project, the clarity of work boundaries and strong management and supervision structures were important steps towards building an effective project of this nature.


The project continues to develop and has had to resist calls for expansion, preferring instead to consolidate and improve its current focus, recognising that capacity needs to match need. However, funding has recently become available for two more youth workers to be attached to the project. These workers are funded by a Pacific trust and will work with Pacific and other youth. The management of the many relationships that are part of the project is reported to be challenging, but overall the Christchurch Youth Project is considered stable and developing.


9 TAIERI TRUST RIVER CATCHMENT PROJECT

Location: Otago

Duration: 2001� (initiated out of the Taieri Catchment & Community Health [TC&CH] Project, 2000�2001)

Provider: TAIERI Trust

Purpose: to establish a community-based catchment management project

Funder: Sustainable Management Fund (TC&CH funded by Health Research Council, and the University of Otago)


Evaluation: process/ impact

Data used: interviews with the co-ordinator, the researcher and the funder; academic publications; project reports and documents

Current status: the present round of funding ceases in 2004.

Figure 5: An aerial photograph of the Taieri River

Context

The TAIERI Trust River Catchment Project, referred to here onwards as the TAIERI Project, is located in Otago. Cleverly the acronym TAIERI stands for the Taieri Alliance for Information Exchange and River Improvement. The project was founded using a Community Oriented Participatory Action Research project (COPAR), which was undertaken as part of PhD research on health and ecology conducted in the Taieri catchment area between 1999 and 2001 (Parkes and Panelli 2001). The COPAR research project was titled the Taieri Catchment and Community Health Project (TC&CH Project).


The TC&CH Project involved extensive networking and participation of people from exceptionally varied backgrounds in order to collectively address the environmental and related community wellbeing issues facing the Taieri catchment area. It is an example of a multi-stakeholder project that built understandings between different stakeholders and across scientific, health, environmental, farming and industry perspectives. The use of an action reflection model (whereby a deliberate process was used to plan actions on the basis of evidence and then reflect back on the lessons learnt from the actions taken) integrated reflective practices into many levels of the TC&CH Project�s development. The active and participatory character of the project enabled research to inform its development. The purpose of the TC&CH Project was to involve a spectrum of stakeholders in a process of inquiry aimed at identifying and mobilising existing community and scientific knowledge within the catchment, and strengthening the capacity for integrated, catchment-based approaches to water resource management and related public health issues (Parkes 2003). The main public health issues included the ecological determinants of waterborne disease, and the links between rural development, ecological sustainability and community wellbeing. The research project led to the formation of the TAIERI Trust committee, which is responsible for the TAIERI Project. The TAIERI Project�s current funding from the Ministry for the Environment�s Sustainable Management Fund finishes on 30 June 2004. Key tasks under the current funding include:

• enhancing existing relationships and partnerships between communities, researchers and agencies

• establishing an information exchange system for effective communication, which includes a web site, newsletters and events

• implementing actions for environmental improvement, to include catchment classification, practical enhancement initiatives and education

• designing reflection and evaluation strategies to enable ongoing review and dissemination of the catchment approach (Edgar 2002).

Project practices

The TAIERI Project is a partnership between the Taieri community, Otago University and the New Zealand Landcare Trust (NZLCT). The TAIERI Trust has five trustees − four represent different geographic areas of the catchment area and one represents the university. There is also a wider management group that involves other community members, Fish and Game, Otago Regional Council and three divisions of the University of Otago (Health Sciences, Sciences and Humanities). The TAIERI Project co-ordinator was appointed in 2001. Trained in ecology and familiar with the Taieri catchment area and communities, she has provided a bridge between the different organisations and individuals involved in the project. The skills and networking abilities of the co-ordinator enabled the project to be developed at all levels. The co-ordinator acknowledges that melding scientific and community knowledge and practices through the participation of a large number of different stakeholders is a considerable task. A review of the project in 2002 highlighted the critical role the co-ordinator plays as a facilitator, mediator and interpreter (Edgar 2002):


My work includes planting trees, organising people to be involved, and facilitating events. One of my major roles is translating scientific information into a form that the community can understand. I have to interpret the aquatic ecology information that comes out of the university. The community sometimes find it difficult to understand. I just translate it into a report that�s easier to read. (Interview � project co-ordinator)

The TAIERI co-ordinator creates opportunities for information sharing and skills development across the many people and organisations in the Taieri catchment in order to achieve a greater level of environmental management. Specific projects include public meetings, newsletters, field days, environmental education in schools, a web site, tree planting, walkway construction, and erosion/weed control. The development of various methods for attracting people to meetings (including different levels of participation at different times) and the importance of valuing volunteer community people and the skills they have to offer are ongoing challenges. Currently an important aspect of the TAIERI Project is the involvement of the chief executive officer of the NZLCT, who has supported the TAIERI Trust from its inception in 2001. The NZLCT was approached by the funder and the TAIERI Trust to become involved. The NZLCT employs the TAIERI Trust co-ordinator and offers professional development, guidance and reviews. It also provides office furniture and computers to the co-ordinator and her assistant, as well as all accountancy services. The chief executive officer acts as a mentor to the co-ordinator and offers practical support to the project when necessary. The completion of the TC&CH Project and the PhD researcher�s withdrawal from involvement with the TAIERI Project meant it had to develop its own evaluative frameworks. An evaluation was incorporated into the current funding package as an essential component of the project. Those involved in the TAIERI Trust have different views on the type of evaluation that might be required. An audit commissioned by the funder was completed this year.

Relationships

The number and diversity of stakeholders (from industry, residents, the university and a range of government agencies) involved in this project reflect the emphasis the TC&CH Project gave to relationship building as a critical component for the project�s development. The multi-stakeholder process began with the setting up of community reference groups and a whole catchment survey as part of the initial project. The TC&CH Project strengthened knowledge, communication and relationships between farmers, academics and government agencies. This process led to the development of the TAIERI Trust, and a management group which takes on various tasks to govern and manage the TAIERI Project. The farmers involved with the Project have actively engaged with studies of water quality in the upper Taieri and made a submission to the Otago Regional Council to support a PhD scholarship focusing on water quality in the Taieri River. The TAIERI trustees seek academic research that clearly benefits the community and the river.


Consultation with Mäori was an integral part of the TC&CH Project. Parkes (2003) acknowledges that while supportive of the project, the extensive commitments of iwi restrict their involvement. Consultation was ongoing rather than one-off, involving correspondence, individual and group meetings with representatives from Kai Tahu ki Otago Ltd (a Mäori health community worker and a health protection officer), the Department of Conservation (kaupapa atawhai manager, Otago Conservancy), the University of Otago (Ngāi Tahu Mäori Health Research Unit), as well as individuals from hapü and whänau in the area. This consultation has resulted in an invitation by the Executive Komiti of Te Rünanga o Otakou for researchers in the project to attend wänanga held at the Sinclair Wetlands in May 2000; active participation by Mäori at the community, researcher and agency level; and the incorporation of Mäori perspectives into the development and formulation of all stages of the research (Parkes 2003). The funder sees its role as monitoring the effective use of government funds and being accountable to government. The funding contact person manages 60 other projects. The TC&CH Project researcher and the TAIERI co-ordinator have engaged proactively with the funder through regular conversations and an invitation to visit the project, which the funder accepted.

Lessons learnt

The completion of the TC&CH Project�s health survey and the formation of the reference groups marked a significant point in the development of the Project. The multi-layered communication and consultation strands built from that point have continued to consolidate. Parkes (2003) outlines a number of significant moments in the development of the TC&CH Project that led to the achievement of the project�s objectives and the eventual transition to the TAIERI Project, including:

• an initial meeting of the researcher with government agencies, where the research idea was presented and communication lines opened

• the rounds of community meetings that introduced the project, formed focus groups for discussion and proposed a community survey

• the design and implementation of the Taieri Catchment and Community Health survey • the rounds of community meetings that discussed the results of the survey and

proposed community-based projects and a forum • the formalisation of a community−university partnership and funding for the set-up

phase of the TAIERI Project • the employment of two community liaison officers to manage the community−university

partnership and apply for funding • a barbeque in Middlemarch for project participants • receipt of funding from the Sustainable Management Fund • formation of the TAIERI Trust as a legal entity • appointment of the TAIERI project co-ordinator (Parkes 2003).

The transition of the TC&CH Project into the TAIERI Project was supported by funding provided by the University of Otago for two community liaison officers responsible for maintaining a profile for the project and applying for funding from the Ministry for the Environment. The relationship between the university and the project remains important, with the university providing access to students and research capacity. To date, six students have worked with the co-ordinator at different times.


The review of the TAIERI Project by Edgar (2002) revealed strong support for the TAIERI Trust, the project co-ordinator and the work of the project. The report recommended that the Trust revisit the original project objectives and establish a community forum to meet regularly as a way to achieve increased community engagement with the project. It was noted that significant environmental changes would not occur in the three years the project was funded for and community and agency expectations needed to be managed. Further recommendations were made for greater engagement of iwi and resource management agencies. Conflicts of interest were noted and acknowledged as inherent to the make-up of the Trust and not to be avoided. It was identified that clarification of the Trust roles and procedures was required. Finally, the sustainability of the project was discussed and the need for planning the long-term viability of the project was raised. Edgar acknowledges that in the absence of renewed funding for a full-time co-ordinator or increased voluntary involvement of the trustees in the operation of the project, the TAIERI Project is likely to be heavily diminished in its scope and scale of activities (Edgar 2003:22−4). Members of the TAIERI Project noted that an active relationship between the funder and provider made an important contribution to the development of the project. A strategic plan with a process for implementation and a mentor providing continuity and support for the project and the co-ordinator had been influential. Also important was tangible evidence of the project for the community to see, such as tree plantings. Local community involvement has waned recently as the energy required affects already busy people who have to travel long distances to meetings (up to 150 km in one case) and for no remuneration, unlike other salaried people on the Trust. Retaining local representation and involvement is an ongoing issue of concern for the project. One strategy devised to address this issue has been to ask all trustees to nominate another person from their area/department to attend a meeting whenever possible, so that when one trustee is unable to attend meetings the other person can. Current activities include the development of a web page, a video resource, a folder of curriculum-based activities for use in Taieri primary schools, stream restoration activities, establishing community stream care groups, organising workshops to address environmental issues, ongoing development of the relationships between stakeholders, and the regular publication of a newsletter.


10 PACIFICA GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT PROJECT

Location: nationwide

Duration: 2000−2003

Provider: PACIFICA

Purpose: to train members in roles, responsibilities and project management; to rewrite the constitution and policy handbook; to develop a web site

Funder: Community Employment Group (CEG)


Evaluation: no formal evaluation, but milestones and a report to CEG

Data used in analysis: interview with president; an interim and final report to CEG

Current status: project completed but further funding from CEG for a mentoring programme for young women has been assigned.

Context

PACIFICA is a national organisation for Pacific women. The organisation was established in 1976 at the time of the biggest wave of migration from the Pacific Islands. Its purpose was to encourage and inspire Pacific women to reach their full potential so that they could contribute to the �cultural, social, economic, and political development� of their new country. It has always encouraged women into leadership roles and enabled women to develop leadership skills through involvement in the organisation. It is a powerful network for Pacific women, and many Pacific women in policy and consultancy positions in New Zealand are PACIFICA members. The organisation is pan-Pacific but supports the separate identities of each culture. Its leaders have been Samoan or Cook Islands, but it does work across the different Pacific communities. The organisation is modelled on the Pacific family collective, where roles, responsibilities and obligations to the collective draw members together. The collective can only function effectively if each member is supported and taken care of. In the South Pacific, women�s committees are present in every village. An example of this is in Samoa, where in pre-European contact times the women born into a village belonged to the aualuma (daughters of the village) and lived together under the sao tamaitai (leader of the women). The organisation of the aualuma matched the organisation of the village. The aualuma was a powerful entity in its own right because sisters had a higher ranking than brothers (see Schoeffel et al 1996). Wives, because they come from outside the village, had a lower ranking. The arrival of the missionaries changed all this. The missionaries wanted parents living together and ministers� wives to be the leaders of the village women. Women�s committees were set up to organise the church and that gave power to wives because they were put into decision-making roles (Fairbairn-Dunlop 1996).


In the 1930s in Samoa, the komiti tumana (village health committees) were set up. These committees were, and still are, responsible for the personal and public health of all women and children in the village. As part of this role they support immunisation and nutrition programmes, check the houses and inspect the whole village for cleanliness, and make sure there is no rubbish present. In the 1970s and 1980s these committees extended their role into projects that generated income for the village and enabled village facilities such as churches, schools and health clinics to be upgraded (Fairbairn-Dunlop 1996). Today, the komiti tumana are vital and are regarded as customary institutions. All women belong to these committees (Fairbairn-Dunlop 1996:16b). The Cook Islands� women�s committees are known as au vaine. The au vaine look after child care and the general hygiene and wellbeing of the village. In the past their responsibility for the wellbeing of the village included imposing penalties on people who shirked their responsibilities; for example, people who did not take good care of their children or who did not control their livestock. PACIFICA was set up in Aotearoa New Zealand by Pacific women who came from islands with a history of women�s committees. As well, they understood the importance of the role of women�s committees to empower women and to have their voice included in policy decisions. In 2000 PACIFICA had a number of issues that needed to be addressed. There was evidence of mismanagement of funds, and there seemed to be a lack of vision as to where the organisation was heading. They wanted to set up projects but could not get funding because of the debt they were carrying. They talked with the Community Employment Group (CEG) about what needed to happen, and CEG agreed to fund them for management and governance training. The package involved training workshops for their National Executive Committee and other interested members on roles and responsibilities, professional development, building positive relationships with government and non-government organisations, rewriting and updating their constitution, rewriting their policy handbook, and developing a web site. This form of community action developed the skills of members to be better able to manage their organisation, and in so doing developed the capacity of the wider Pacific organisations the women are involved with through their work in PACIFICA.

Project practices

The Management Training Project was wholly funded by CEG. This project fitted with CEG�s capacity-building approach. The funding was to pay for administration costs for organising the training and to pay the consultants used for the training. The �PACIFICA friendly� consultants who were contracted to run the training were either members of PACIFICA or friends of the organisation and were aware of the financial predicament of the organisation. The consultants donated the money back to PACIFICA�s general fund because they understood the situation of the organisation and saw the potential that had yet to be fully utilised. All nine executive members attended the training, along with other interested PACIFICA members. The training proved to be very popular and met the needs of a number of Pacific women. The contract was for three training workshops, but in fact nine were held. One workshop attracted 70 participants. Because the training workshops were conducted throughout New Zealand, branch members in the different regions who held positions of responsibility and other interested local Pacific organisations were able to participate.


Part of the CEG funding package included assistance for rewriting the constitution and the policy handbook. The reasoning behind this was:

It is no use to have trained up your whole management systems if you didn�t actually have a sound basis to work on. (Interview � project member)

Changing the constitution meant consulting with every branch, and that took a year. The policy handbook has now been completed but may need some slight alterations to match the constitution. The emphasis given to creating the policy handbook reflects how procedure and a clear structure of roles and responsibilities are very important in this organisation:

... one of the key things in terms of PACIFICA itself is a comprehensive knowledge of the constitution and meeting procedures because we are Pacific in the best way, well we haven�t worked out a better way, is that our business is run in quite a formal manner and at least that way everyone knows where they are. (Interview � project member)

Given the formal procedural nature of the organisation, change was only likely to take place through a change in policy. CEG required milestones to be met and an interim report and a final report. The project took longer than expected because of the need to consult with every branch about the changes made to the constitution.

Relationships

This training project was based on the membership of PACIFICA having relationships that connect this organisation to other government organisations, including CEG. There was expertise to call upon to create the training programme from within the organisation itself and from past members − most of the Pacific women policy consultants were PACIFICA members. PACIFICA attracts a range of women, from grandmothers who share their weaving and tivaevae knowledge, to university-qualified professionals, to self-employed businesswomen and others who work within the voluntary sector, to young sisters and daughters who are still in the education system. The women organising the training had a good relationship with their funder, CEG, which was the only department prepared to fund them due to their past financial problems. That was possibly because a number of PACIFICA members work with CEG, but also because some PACIFICA branches have a history of running successful small projects. CEG�s focus on skill enhancement enabled the women to gain skills through the training that were transferable to the workplace and had the potential to lead to improved employment opportunities. The organisation has a collegial relationship with the Mäori Women�s Welfare League because some of the League�s members also belong to PACIFICA and because they sometimes sit on committees together. The Mäori Women�s Welfare League has always been supportive of PACIFICA.


Lessons learnt

The CEG contract was to run three training sessions, but they actually ended up running nine workshops because three sessions were not enough to cover what was needed:

We actually undertook nine workshops and that is, I suppose, really a reflection of a reality check of what we wanted to achieve in those three workshops was too big and we needed to run repeat workshops and re-tell and re-share the information in a context that made sense to the women in their own regions and in their own branches. (Interview � project member)

PACIFICA is a voluntary organisation and they realised they had high expectations of their executive committee members, all of whom were voluntary. They ran a workshop on roles and responsibilities and as a result rewrote their job descriptions:

The most detailed one is around finance because that is where we had the biggest hiccough. (Interview � project member)

As a group they have had to rethink cultural perceptions and Pacific protocols. In the past when a member died, the national president would present an envelope of about $1,000 and branches would also give separate donations. Now there is only one envelope given and it does not come from PACIFICA�s general fund but from everyone�s donations. The thinking behind this decision was that it was important to maintain cultural practice, but it was also important to consider the short- and/or long-term consequences of how that was practised. Discussion and debate by members about issues is an important part of PACIFICA. Rewriting the constitution made the national executive realise that in order for the changes to take place there needed to be input and discussion by all PACIFICA members. This led to a consultation process which took a year but meant that everyone had the opportunity to contribute. Being �in the red� forced members to rethink and reflect and brought about a turning point. They have conceived some future projects as a result of the training and the thinking that came out of the training. The training has been important because it has given the women skills in project management, and because the organisation is national it runs both national and regional projects. CEG has just approved further funding for a mentoring programme for young PACIFICA women.


APPENDIX: PROJECT DETAILS

Provider Funder Fund-holding organisation

Structure Duration of project

Activities

Moerewa Community Project: Moerewa

He Iwi Kotahi Tätou trust

ALAC, CEG n/a Trust and paid co-ordinator

1998− Community development including social, cultural and economic

Waitomo Papakainga Tracker Programme: Kaitaia

Waitomo Papakainga Development Society Inc.

CYF; Crime Prevention Unit

n/a Incorporated society operated by a whänau

1998−2000 Youth development � social, education, cultural

Peaceful Waves/ Matangi Malie: Auckland

Group Special Education

Ministry of Health, Public Health Directorate

n/a A project of GSE, with a project team

1995− Non-violence programmes for people from Pacific Islands.

Pasifika Healthcare Gardening Project: Waitakere

Pasifika Healthcare

Waitakere District Health Board, Healthlink

n/a A project of Pasifika Healthcare

1998 Backyard competitions, preschool gardening competitions, a community garden

Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project: Waikato

Environment Waikato and Whaingaroa Environment

Sustainable Management Fund

Environment Waikato

Overseen by Environment Waikato, and WE group with paid co-ordinator; now WEC

1995−2001 Public meetings; tours of the catchment; catchment management plan; formation of the Whaingaroa Environment Centre

He Rangihou New Day Project of the Opotiki Safer Communities Council: Opotiki

Opotiki Safer Communities Council

Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Health

Opotiki District Council (ODC)

Two workers employed by ODC

1998 − Drug education; health promotion; hapü-focused initiatives; school activities; policy consultation; awareness raising and debate; community grants; building alliances; community safety programme

Rough Cut Youth Development Project: Westport / Buller Region

Rough Cut Youth Development Project

Department of Internal Affairs

Buller REAP Umbrella organisation plus paid co-ordinators

1999−2002 Film-making course including life skills training

Christchurch Youth Project: Christchurch

Christchurch City Council and Christchurch Police

Christchurch City Council

Christchurch City Council

Three youth workers employed by Council and managed jointly with Police Youth Aid

1997− Youth worker project working Mon � Thurs with young offenders and their care givers, referred by Police Youth Aid; street youth work on Friday nights

TAIERI Trust River Catchment Project: Otago

TAIERI Trust Sustainable Management Fund, NZ Landcare Trust, University of Otago

n/a Paid co-ordinator; management committee; Trust

2000− Development and management of a community-based catchment management project; activities include workshops and education in schools and community

PACIFICA Governance and Management Project: Nationwide

PACIFICA CEG n/a Executive Committee 2000− Governance and management training programme for executive members

Note: ALAC = Alcohol Advisory Council of NZ; CEG = Community Employment Group; CYF = Department of Child, Youth and Family; GSE = Group Special Education; WEC = Whaingaroa Environment Centre.


REFERENCES Adair V, Dixon R, Coggan C, et al. 2000. Final Report for the Evaluation of the Drugs Education Development Project. Auckland: University of Auckland.

Asiasiga L, Gray A. 1998. Intervening to Prevent Family Violence in Pacific Communities: A literature review for the Offending by Pacific Peoples Project (OPPS). Wellington: Ministry of Justice.

Bell A, Swinburn B, Simmons D, et al. 1999/2000. Heart Disease and Diabetes Risk Factors in Pacific Islands Communities and Associations with Measures of Body Fat. New Zealand Medical Journal. (In press).

Boshier P. 1999. Time for reflection, and change. Paper presented at the Pacific Vision International Conference, Aotea Centre, Auckland, 28 July 1999.

Conway K, Megan T, Henwood W, et al. 2000. Milestone Six Report to the Ministry of Education: Community Action on Youth & Drugs Project. Auckland: Alcohol and Public Health Research Unit, University of Auckland.

Conway K, Tunks M, Henwood W, et al. 2000. Te whänau cadillac: a waka for change. Health Education and Behaviour 27: 339−50.

Cribb J. 1997. �Being bashed is something I have to accept�: Western Samoan women�s attitudes towards domestic violence in Christchurch. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand 9: 164−70.

Davis N, Davis D. No date. Our Story. Unpublished report for He Iwi Kotahi Tätou Trust, Moerewa.

Department of Internal Affairs. 2002. Community Based Youth Development Fund: Youth development projects evaluation report. Wellington: Research Services, Department of Internal Affairs.

Duituturaga E. 1988. Pacific Island Study. In: Synergy Applied Research Limited and H McNeill (eds) Attitudes to Family Violence: A study across cultures. Wellington: Family Violence Prevention Co-ordinating Committee, Department of Social Welfare.

Edgar N. 2002. Review of the TAIERI Project. Prepared for the TAIERI Trust, Dunedin.

Egger G, Swinburn B. 1996. The Fat Loss Handbook: A guide for professionals. St Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Environment Waikato. 2001. Local Area Management Strategy (LAMS) Approach Evaluation. Hamilton: Policy Group, Environment Waikato.

Fairbairn-Dunlop P. 1996. Tamaitai Samoa: Their stories. Suva: Institute of Pacific Studies.

Hand J, Elizabeth V, Martin B, et al. 2002. Family violence: a Pacific perspective. In: Free from Abuse: What women say and what can be done. Auckland: Public Health Promotion, Auckland District Health Board.

Kilvington M. 1998. The Whaingaroa Catchment Management Project: A multi-stakeholder approach to sustainable catchment management. Contract report: LC9899/021. Lincoln: Landcare Research.

Leota M, Leota J-A. 1997. Food project: the Samoan component. In: N Pollock, D Dixon, N Hunia, et al (eds). Understanding Food Decisions in New Zealand: A report to the Department of Social Welfare. Wellington: Victoria Link Ltd & Department of Anthropology, Victoria University of Wellington.

Moata�ane L, Muimui-Heta S, Guthrie B. 1996. Tongan perceptions of diet and diabetes mellitus. Journal of the New Zealand Dietetic Association 50: 52−6.

New Zealand Landcare Trust. 2003. An Integrated Catchment Management Project Managed by NZ Landcare Trust. http://www.landcare.co.nz/hot.asp?PublicationID=1766532954.

Oliver P, Spee K. 2000. Evaluation of Mäori Community Initiatives for Youth at Risk of Offending: Report on the Tracker Programme, Waitomo Papakainga, Kaitaia. Prepared for CYFS, Auckland.

Opotiki Safer Communities Council. 2001. He Rangihou New Day Project: A community development/community action approach to youth drug issues: January 1998 to June 2001. Opotiki: Opotiki Safer Communities Council, Opotiki District Council.


Parkes M. 2003. From �Taieri Catchment & Community Health Project� to �Taieri Trust�: A Community Oriented Participatory Action Research (COPAR) evaluation. In: Linking Ecosystems and Social Systems for Health and Sustainability: Public health lessons from the Taieri River Catchment, PhD Thesis. Dunedin: Department of Public Health and Department of Geography.

Parkes M, Panelli R. 2001. Integrating catchment ecosystems and community health: the value of participatory action research. Ecosystem Health 7: 85�106

Schoeffel P, Meleisea M, David R, et al. 1996. Pacific Islands Polynesian attitudes to child training and discipline in New Zealand: some policy implications for social welfare and education. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand 6: 134−47.

Stanway L, Thorpe R. 2001. A Plan for a Sustainable Environment in the Whaingaroa Catchment: Fourth draft. Unpublished report prepared for Whaingaroa Environment and Environment Waikato, Raglan.

Stone A. 1999. When home becomes a battlefield. New Zealand Herald, 24 August.