Doing IT Better project Summary report

March 2010
Larry Stillman PhD Stefanie Kethers PhD Rebecca French Monash University Dean Lombard Victorian Council of Social Service

Acknowledgements The project team acknowledges the support of the many people in the community sector who worked with us on this project.
Copyright 2010 Centre for Community Networking Research, Monash University & Victorian Council of Social Service. Centre for Community Networking Research Caulfield School of IT Monash University Caulfield East, Victoria Australia, 3145 Victorian Council of Social Service Level 8, 128 Exhibition Street Melbourne, Victoria Australia, 3000 Graphic design by Nicole Dominic For sales enquiries: [email protected] +61 3 9654 5050 www.doingitbetter.net.au

Particular thanks are due to the managers of the seven case study organizations for their forbearance in allowing us to intrude into the lives of their organizations. Thanks are also due to Graeme Johanson of Monash University and Marina Henley of VCOSS for their support through the Steering Committee, the members of the Reference Group for their work and guidance, and the interest of many people in the community services sector. The generous support of a foundation for funding this project must be especially acknowledged. It is significant that a private foundation was prepared to support and promote action research with the community services sector on technology issues. We hope this inspires others, and particularly government, to do the same. We also acknowledge the financial support of the Community Sector Investment Fund, Multimedia Victoria and VCOSS.

CONTENTS

1. Project goal ............................................................................................... 2 2. Project recommendations ............................................................ 3 3. Project ndings .................................................................................... 4 4. Future action 5. Acronyms 7. References
.......................................................................................

14

............................................................................................... 17

6. Key terms ................................................................................................ 17

............................................................................................. .............................................................

19 20

APPENDIX 1: Project aims

APPENDIX 2: Project strategies .................................................. 21 APPENDIX 3: Project rationale

................................................... 23

APPENDIX 4: Endorsement by Doing IT Better Reference Group

...............................................

26

Table 1: Findings Matched to Original Project Aims ... 14 Unless otherwise indicated, photographs, diagrams and gures are the work of the Project Team.

Doing IT Better summary report

1. PROJECT GOAL

To enable community service organizations (CSOs) to signicantly improve their organizational technological expertise and their ability to transmit that expertise to their clientsultimately empowering both.
This report documents the progress and evolution of the Doing IT Better project. Doing IT Better is a three-year project set up to build information and communications technology (ICT) capacity in the Victorian community services sector. It was established in recognition that CSOs like government and commercial organizations are now dependent on ICT systems to support basic organizational functions and service delivery. However, limited nancial resources and a shortage of ICT skills and know-how in the sector have left most agencies struggling. The project is premised on the understanding that improved ICT capacity will improve organizational efciencies, enabling more resources to be directed to the community services sectors core business of providing direct service delivery and advocacy for vulnerable and disadvantaged Victorians. Doing IT Better is a social justice initiative of the Centre for Community Networking Research (Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University) and the Victorian Council of Social Service, generously funded, anonymously, by a foundation. A Reference Group, comprising community sector workers and specialists from the ICT industry, has guided the projects work. This report identies key issues that affect how the community services sector uses ICT and suggests how, with appropriate support, the sector can use ICT
Documenting processes in a workshop

more effectively to both improve internal processes and support the provision of better services and, ultimately, outcomes for its clients. Its ndings and recommendations are based on a number of sources of information: case studies undertaken by the project with different types of CSOs; feedback and appraisals from workshops, seminars, and conferences conducted by the project; input from the Doing IT Better Reference Group; and review of scholarly reports, government publications, and reports and studies from community sector organizations.

Doing IT Better summary report

2. PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS

1
1.1 1.2

That the Victorian Government provides ve years of funding to establish and operate a Centre of ICT Excellence in Community Services. The Centre will undertake the following activities: Strategic planning in relation to the use of ICT in the community services sector. Expert advice for community services organizations (for example, in relation to knowledge and information management, change management, interoperability, and ICT requirements elicitation). ICT operational support for those CSOs that wish to outsource some or all of their ICT operations. ICT education and training for CSOs. Advocacy and representation in relation to ICT matters affecting the community services sector at the local, state, and national levels. That all levels of government and other funders adequately fund sustainable ICT systems (which constitute people and computer skills, assets and support networks) when funding CSOs. As part of those commitments: All funding and service agreements to include allocations for the true costs of ICT infrastructure and development. The formula for determining ICT support to be developed in conjunction with the Centre of ICT Excellence in Community Services. That further research be funded on the measurement of ICT outcomes and impacts, including the development of industry tools for assessing the relationship between ICT investment and improved client outcomes and opportunities. That partnership with higher education, government, and other interested parties be encouraged and supported.

1.3 1.4 1.5

2
2.1

2.2

3 4

Doing IT Better summary report

3. PROJECT FINDINGS

1.The community services sector needs ICT leadership in order to take on the programs that allow it to become a smart sector. The increasing sector engagement with the project growing from small meetings of interested people to large, well-attended professional development seminarsdemonstrates a hunger for knowledge and information about how to best use ICT for improving community services. The result of the ongoing participation of many people is a Community of Practice around ICT issues for the sector. This is now well established, but requires support and leadership to remain active and focused. VCOSS is the obvious body to provide that leadership and the development of a representative specialist group within VCOSS to carry forward a dedicated program of improvement will be critical to meeting future ICT challenges. However, VCOSS needs direct support from its partners in the sector and government in order to properly represent the diversity of technological and services interest in the sector. 2. Government should develop public policy and investment that support ICT solutions for the community sector. Government needs to be prepared to invest signicantly in policy development and people-technology solutions with the community services sector because all indications are that these solutions will produce a social and efciency dividend in the long term. Such a conclusion is supported by both the projects research

and the ndings of the Productivity Commission Research Report (Jan 2010): Contribution of the Notfor-Prot Sector. However, the policy and formulae for supporting the community services sector must be developed in conjunction with the sector. 3. A major opportunity exists for those engaged in research and development, such as universities, to help develop mechanisms, information processes and, potentially, products to support the ICT needs of the community services sector. The project has greatly increased awareness at Monash University about the needs of the sector and possibilities for working with it. Monash is increasingly applying the principles of social justice and social inclusion to its work, and recognizes this is an opportunity for mutually benecial activity. 4. Individual CSOs will have their own circumstances, opportunities and limitations which determine how they can take advantage of ICT for the betterment of their client base. Collaborative case studies that initiate change are a journey embarked upon in partnership with an organization: there is a great need for researcher uidity and responsiveness when negotiating where you go on the journey and where it ends. The inappropriateness of cookie cutter solutions quickly became clear.

Doing IT Better summary report

Case studies looked at a diverse range of CSOs, operating in urban and regional settings. They included: the Victorian Alcohol and Drug Association (VAADA), a small peak organization; the Springvale Community Aid and Advice Bureau (SCAAB), a generalist social services agency which serves large numbers of recent arrivals; Womens Health Loddon Mallee (WHLM), a womens health information service in regional Victoria; Northcote Community Information and Support Service (NCISS), a community information centre in the inner northern suburbs of Melbourne; Travellers Aid, a service which provides help to needy travelers and disabled people located at Flinders Street and Southern Cross Station; the Regional Information and Advocacy Centre (RIAC), an organization serving disabled people and their carers across north-western Victoria; and Baywest Youth Housing Group/Latitude, an organization serving vulnerable young homeless people in the western suburbs of Melbourne. The case studies, particularly, illustrate different needs, capacities, and approaches to ICT issues in a changing physical and electronic environment. Baywest/Latitude spoke of the evolving environment in which they worked, with ICT very much part of this evolution. In each of these studies, while there was a similar series of action research steps for problem diagnosis and action, different solutions were adopted. Thus, the SCAAB case study required attention, on and off, for many months, while the studies involving WHLM and RIAC were limited to two meetings, phone calls and emails, though signicant work was conducted with each.

Developing an information ow

5. More information, education and networking on ICT opportunities and issues are needed within the sector. The numerous activities and events conducted by the project, including a yearly conference, have brought together people from across the community sector who have either expertise in or understanding of the value of ICT. This Community of Practice is now of a signicant size and has been a key part of the projects success. The email announcement and discussion list continues to grow (currently it has 340 subscribers) and the project is also in regular communication with the almost 2,000 subscribers to the VCOSS Training and Development Clearinghouses PIECES eBulletin. The Community of Practice is beginning to have a life of its own as a facilitator of knowledge sharing and alliance building, and is now well placed to support future ICT initiatives in the sector.

Doing IT Better summary report

Information seminar, 2009*

Greater discussion of and engagement with ICT issues has led to a noticeable change in the way the sector views ICT. It is no coincidence that the highest seminar attendance and greatest follow-up discussion was to do with ICT strategic planning. There is a growing recognition in the sector that ICT infrastructure is fundamental, not incidental, and this has coincided with the growing engagement of the sector with Doing IT Better. Similarly, the increased incidence of and readiness to embrace new technologies within the sector appears to be connected with greater awareness of the technologies as well as the existence of forums in which to seek advice and support both of which were facilitated by the project. The two information seminar series (2008 and 2009, the latter sponsored by Multimedia Victoria) have had an enormous impact, demonstrated by the many
*Photo: Queen Victoria Womens Centre
6 Doing IT Better summary report

comments received by the project. Thirteen seminars on topics as diverse as disaster recovery, information management, innovative technologies, contact databases, needs assessments and strategic planning have drawn over 450 people from across the community services sector (involving around 200 different CSOs) as well as from government and the ICT industry. Topics were initially based on the project teams pre-existing understanding of projects or issues that were relevant or useful to the CSO sector. As the project unfolded, the seminars, aimed at building expertise and capacity, began to respond to emerging issues. Early in 2009 the Reference Group nominated topics for the last six seminars based on ndings from the case studies and insights gleaned from interaction with the Community of Practice. Unsurprisingly, this last phase of seminars was the best attended. The high level of interest in the seminars demonstrates a signicant need for this type of information and guidance in the sector. That the project received many requests for sessions to be repeated, held regionally, or released as video podcasts afrms this demand. Some issues in particular attracted enormous interest, suggesting that there are great needs in the sector for information around: information, knowledge, and records management; ICT strategic planning; interoperability; social media; and contact management.

6. The changing operational focus of CSOs is delivering opportunities for better service delivery but also producing tensions as organizations seek to meet reporting and accountability requirements while lacking resources to do so. There is a shift in the nature of welfare and community work, from the previous focus on social or relational practices that centered on the story or narrative of an individual or family. Now the focus is more on the management of a case, through planning, information provision, and data collection, where substantial data sets are often captured in large information systems used for accountability purposes by funding agencies. Agencies are often faced with the need to report to multiple sources, creating the burden of duplicated data entry (and the potential for error). Interoperabilitysystems able to talk to each other and exchange informationis underdeveloped, despite various initiatives within the social support bureaucracy. With governments far better resourced than the community services sector, this has created a signicant technological imbalance. Data sharing problems are also discussed at length in the Productivity Commission report. In addition, there is a move to what Harry Ferguson, professor of social work at Bristol in the United Kingdom, calls practice on the move; that is, a ow of mobile practices between public and private worlds, organizations and service users, the ofce and the home (Ferguson 2008). Thus, in the case studies of SCAAB, RIAC, and BWYHG/Latitude, mobile phones and applications that can be run through mobile phones are all part of the future for both workers and clients in

exchanging information or providing then-and-there service. Even in a relatively small state like Victoria, the size of Melbourne and the dispersed nature of the regional population both mean that mobile and related broadband solutions are bound to become increasingly important. 7. A non-alignment of philosophies of service and operations is contributing to ineffective use of ICT in CSOs. If technology is meant to benet clients, the sector needs support in developing the means to demonstrate the social and economic return on investment in ICT, even if outcomes are long-term and not amenable to simple causal models (a problem which the Productivity Commission has also recognized). The projects case studies produced strong indications, which require more partnership research to conrm, of an efciency dividend in social, service and nancial terms though effective investment in the people-technology mix. However, the non-alignment of service and operational philosophies means that reporting and accountability systems can be perceived as a bogeyman. In fact, an intelligent and informed dialogue between the sector and government bureaucracy could overcome problems and enable further efciencies though the intelligent and strategic use of data to improve services.

Doing IT Better summary report

8. Data duplication is a burden on the sector. CSOs involved in the Doing IT Better project, as part of case studies or through representation at workshops, seminars or conferences, all identied data management, including duplication of data, as a key issue. This nding is also supported by the Productivity Commission report. CSOs generate and collect different types of data and information for a range of purposes including: reporting to funders on service delivery and against quality benchmarks; reporting to boards of management on activities; appraising staff performance; evaluating service model effectiveness; identifying service system trends; and organizational strategic planning.

Because most organizations receive funding via multiple programs, they are increasingly required to feedback evaluation data into multiple information systems. The lack of harmonization and exchangeability between different information systems and quality frameworks leads to a disproportionate administrative burden and limits organizations capacities to make good use of the information they collect. These problems have plagued the community sector for decades and become worse in recent years as data collection and quality assurance have moved to an electronic framework. However, before the Doing IT Better project, there was no sector-focused analysis or a cohesive voice on the issue. An Interoperability Working Group associated with the project has not only described the problems in detail and devised practical solutions, but has proactively engaged government and the academic sector to begin nding and delivering solutions. This has already yielded fruit: the Ofce for the Community Sector undertook a quality assurance data mapping pilot project as a direct result of issues raised at the Doing IT Better Interoperability Forum.

The Interoperability Forum in 2009 played a key role in raising government and sector awareness of the impacts of multiple information systems on the sector.

Doing IT Better summary report

9. Knowledge and information management skills are critical for frontline workers and managers of CSOs, and need to be taken into account by boards and funders. One of the key messages of the Doing IT Better project is that funding of basic IT infrastructure (PCs, servers, databases) will not automatically lead to efciency savings and better management of data and information. Organizations and community service workers repeatedly expressed difculties in understanding and managing the ows of information and knowledge around their organizations. For example, organizations frequently do not have the human and technical resources to manage client and operational records according to legislative requirements and standards. When it comes to local information a critical issue in service provision CSOs have difculty in locating or even managing the information they have, whether on paper or a computer. Small to medium sized CSOs often lack the resources to source and employ records, information and knowledge management experts, and therefore rely on volunteers or administration staff to serve this function. The mission-critical knowledge held by individual staff in their personal information systems (and, often, in their heads) is often not recognized until a staff member departs.

Consequently, there is a pressing need to provide expert support to CSOs that goes beyond basic IT maintenance to encompass the assessment and design of information systems that can provide real ease of use and reduce repetitive information seeking. Keeping good records, maintaining access to service information and focusing on sector-friendly forms of knowledge management is vital to organizational memory. Information systems (such as databases) to support these activities need to be implemented in concert with awareness training, policy and procedure development, and regular access to expertise. This expertise need not be ongoing or expensive organizations could explore the use of students on placements, trained volunteers, or corporate or institutional partnerships.

Doing IT Better summary report

11. Developing ways to measure the impacts of ICT on organizations and clients is needed and will build the case for further investment. While it is possible in the business world to directly measure nancial impacts (cost/benet analysis), this is an extraordinarily difcult task for the community sector, as the Productivity Commission review highlighted. The most difcult task of alland one which was a primary aim of the project is to document and change the impact of ICT on clients through their interactions with agencies, as well as how people used ICT to effect what might be called citizenship transactions, or other forms of non-formal social engagement and communication. CSOs indicated that substantial direct cost savings could be produced through more effective use of and investment in ICT, and that these cost savings could be directed at client support in particular (for example, more front-line case workers). It also became apparent that researchers have not yet developed a practical, ethical, and effective means of demonstrating long-term client impacts on interactions with ICT. As a result, the project relied on the informed and valuable assessments of community sector workers. It is signicant that organizations such as SCAAB and Travellers Aid, which deal with large numbers of clients in need, speak of ICT outcomes and impacts which preserve and enhance the dignity of the client, whatever the contact point: through in-house once only client records, or better use of mobile technologies to enhance face-to-face or other services.

A service map of people-technology relationships produced during a workshop.

10. CSOs lack substantive and sustained ICT infrastructure support. There have been numerous initiatives over the past ten years that focused on one-off provision of ICT to CSOs. However, the planned deployment of this technology, including maintenance schedules, training, and ongoing proactive IT support, has been lacking. This means that organizations have not been able to maximize the full potential of their ICT. Organizations may become reliant on volunteers or ad-hoc IT support, which often can only provide emergency repairs rather than ongoing maintenance. In these circumstances, the ability of CSOs to respond to emerging trends in ICT (such as the use of Web 2.0 technologies and social networking) is reduced. CSOs have identied the need for access to regular proactive IT maintenance, planning, and training, and a trusted online list of providers and resources. The Second Doing IT Better Conference also identied a number of different business structures that could be established to support the sector.
10 Doing IT Better summary report

Developing ways to demonstrate how ICT positively affects peoples lives while giving better value for taxpayer or donor dollars will build the case for further and particularly programmatic investment in ICT. 12. Sector innovation is possible. From a situation of incertitude and lack of knowledge, strong visions can emerge as can particularly be seen in the cases of SCAAB and Travellers Aid, where this has led to major government and philanthropic funding for future ICT projects to improve different aspects of their operations. While the leadership of the organizations already had some ideas in mind for technological process, case studies became a method for internally consulting and building capacity for decision-making based upon internal and external knowledge. Baywest/Latitude, a small organization working with homeless young people, has demonstrated that changes do not have to occur at a grand scale to have a profound impact. Since our work with them, it has transformed its internal and external communications through use of Huddle, an online workspace containing powerful project and collaboration tools (at no cost due to the organizations philanthropic status), and the engagement of an IT volunteer via Monash University. According to the Coordinator: Use of the online system has changed our world, and different workspaces have been set up we managed to get it up and running effectively by the time our Accreditation Review occurred and its fair to say the reviewers were impressed with Huddle!!! We have a Latitude Team Workspace, A Committee of Management Workspace and additional subcommittee workspaces as needed. It has increased accountability and transparency. This is a remarkable

outcome for an organization that was struggling to communicate effectively when we rst met them, having only a whiteboard to coordinate its difcult work with young homeless people. The changeand enthusiasm for itdemonstrates the power of effective problem diagnosis and consultation through a bottomup approach. In the case of RIAC, a regional-rural advocacy service, the car is often the mobile ofce, and advanced mobile technologies offer a huge potential for cost savings and better one-on-one service, but such innovations require signicant support from external funders who are prepared to take risks and experiment with different technologies. Innovation can also occur through the development of a community of practice. The strong interest shown in new ideas at the workshops, and in the idea of a new support structure for the sector auspiced by VCOSS, shows that there is potential for the generation of new ideas and methods to support the smart use of ICTs. 13. A structured and sustainable program of skilled volunteers and industry placements could provide essential support to the sector, particularly to smaller CSOs. The experience in the UK, outlined at the projects second annual conference, could be adapted for Australian conditions. An ICT-specic pro bono brokerage service could be developed in partnership with large corporations (via their corporate social responsibility programs) and community-oriented ICT service providers to connect skilled volunteers with small organizations that cannot afford commercial or available discount rates for essential ICT work.
Doing IT Better summary report 11

Modeled on both the Clearinghouses pro bono service and iT4Communities in the UK, it would predominantly provide developmental and assessment type services to help cash-strapped organizations make effective decisions and economical purchases for ICT infrastructure and services. An IT student placement program in partnership with one or more universities Information Technology faculties could be developed (arrangements are being put into place with Monash University, but this program should include a full range of institutions). A range of projects could be undertaken, depending on the different needs of students from particular courses. A community-based facilitator would serve as an intermediary between CSOs needing assistance and the universities, ensuring that expectations were reasonable, project progress satisfactory, and necessary follow up undertaken.

14. Continuing research and development relationships would benet both the community services sector and higher education development. The project has demonstrated, through the involvement of Monash University and input to the Interoperability Working Group by the e-Scholarship Centre at the University of Melbourne, that partnership with academic researchers provides signicant and useful information for different sector constituencies, as well as engaging academics in work that is aligned to their social justice missions. Such work also has the capacity to inuence the development of curricula in higher education. Possible future areas of research and development include: research into the social return on investment in ICTs and industry tools for assessing ICT impacts; and interoperability projects for the sector. Further relationships should be developed with sustainable, long-term funding support from both government and philanthropic sources.

Documentation and discussion of detail is essential

12

Doing IT Better summary report

4. FUTURE ACTION

The ndings and recommendations of the Doing IT Better project can be used by: community service organizations (CSOs) to guide their own strategic use of ICT; generalist policy makers and funders to develop innovative and responsive policy, strategies, and funding to support information and knowledge management practices in the sector, ultimately leading to better outcomes for clients; those who work with the sector in Information Systems and Information Management, as a guide to using community-based research. We also hope that this work will be of interest to funders from government and industry, as well as philanthropists who are seeking new and creative ways to build capacity in the community sector. ICT is fundamental to the way in which the community sector now works, and should be supported so that their services become more effective.

Project recommendations will not just benet individual agencies, but also result in a shared body of knowledge for the sector as a whole. In the changing knowledge and information environment, the cost of effective inclusion and consultation is low compared to the cost of systemic failure which can only increase if the digital divide grows between community agencies and government.

Considering options using the Making the Network Planning tool

Doing IT Better summary report

13

Table 1: Findings Matched to Original Project Aims Original Project Aims Aim 1. To improve advocacy at the case level, enabling individual clients to acquire technological skills and to become independent and take control of their lives. Findings Primary target: clients The project was unable, for practical and ethical reasons, to directly involve vulnerable clients in our research, but relied upon informed opinions of client workers. There is a willingness in organizations to embrace new ICT and work with clients to provide dignity in interactions, subject to appropriate support and resourcing. Dignity was a word that came up in discussions with a number of organizations. We learnt that the mobile phone is the key point of contract with CSOs for certain groups in the population, such as new arrivals or young people, and there is potential for use of mobiles as a communication tool, as well as enhanced internet services. An unintended and signicant nding was the signicant concern raised by workers (particularly data specialists and managers) about the impact of the burden of reporting, particularly the collection of the same data multiple times for different departments and problems with data inoperability. There is a shift in the nature of community service work, from a focus on social or relational practices to the management of a case, through planning, information provision, and data collection. This has led to substantial data sets being captured in large information systems used for accountability purposes by funding agencies. The lack of interoperable data systems is a burden on the sector (and a potentially disempowering outcome for clients) that detracts from the resources that can be devoted to service delivery. Aim 2. To lead to better support of people in their interactions with government agencies such as social security agency Centrelink or in teaching them how to apply for jobs online. Aim 3: To help organizations to overcome client and worker fears of technology and aversion to acquisition of computer skills. Primary target: clients Secondary target: workers and agencies As previously noted, the project was unable to work directly with agencies and clients in their interactions with government agencies. However, there is no doubt that the establishment of a Community of Practice and other activities through VCOSS to advocate for electronic resources for the sector would result in service innovations which can directly benet clients. Primary target: clients and workers Secondary target: agencies As outlined in Aim 1, the project focused on worker issues and succeeded in documenting the cultural and resource issues which constrain effective use of ICT (understood as the knowledge and information systems constructed by people as they interact with technology, including specialist areas such as electronic records management or records and archives management). Raising general awareness on a personal level through the case studies appears to have been an effective strategy. The manager of VAADA spoke of the project opening his head up on ICT possibilities. Skilled advocacy work is a craft (the term used by workers at RIAC), and cannot be completely captured by ICT systems. Face-to-face interaction is still critical with many clients. Having ICT as a tool to support but not impede face-to-face welfare work needs to be considered in ICT planning, particularly if accountability becomes an interruption, burden or replacement for case work.

14

Doing IT Better summary report

Original Project Aims Aim 4: To set in place mechanisms to train organizations to better manage the computer facilities they have.

Findings Primary target: clients and workers Secondary target: agencies The workshops held during the life of the project about information and knowledge management, interoperability, and other sorts of social-technical issues demonstrated a huge market for education of middle management in the sector. The case studies have resulted in a positive attitude toward undergoing change to develop and manage ICT infrastructure (people and machines) more effectively. The development of an Interoperability Working Group demonstrates the capacity of the sector to engage in high-level technical discussions and advocacy on a signicant service issue. Secondly, the case studies demonstrate the importance of also discussing these issues at the coal face with workers and the development of policy advocacy towards government.

Aim 5. To help to make people who work and volunteer in community organizations better users of the technology themselves, and to pass on their knowledge to other people, so that their learnings are not lost.

Primary target: workers and agencies Secondary target: government Through the activity of the project overall, this will be one of the strongest outcomes of the project in the long-term because VCOSS is well placed to convene an ongoing ICT-oriented Community of Practice in the sector to support this (so long as sufcient funding is secured). The project has established a strong Reference Group, which, together with the working groups, can become the core of a Community of Practice to communicate and document information, knowledge management, and ICT-technical issues for the benet of the sector. Additionally, incorporation of ICT-related training into formal and informal learning at all levels of adult education (including university education) has the potential to improve the quality of knowledge and practice in the sector. Regular conferences and events are another signicant means of attracting management to events where new ideas are shared and relationships built. Emerging relationships with higher education will also improve the quality of advice and practice in the sector.

Doing IT Better summary report

15

Original Project Aims Aim 6. To enable community organizations to use new, timesaving forms of communications such as video conferencing or internet phone services which can bring together workers and clients who may be scattered across large distanceseffectively expanding services to those who may not otherwise have access.

Findings Primary target: clients and workers Secondary target: agencies There is an increased awareness of the potential of mobile or internet phone services and communications, but the project has demonstrated that a priority of organizations is to get their internal information and knowledge management services in order, before embarking on new technology projects. In addition, web or mobile phone cannot replace all forms of personalized service in the sector. Web 2.0 increasingly came into the public eye during the life of the project, but there are similar concerns about the capability and capacity of organizations to embark on new ventures without internal skills and capacity. The case study with RIAC demonstrated the huge potential for mobile technologies to assist with geographically and car-based services or home-visits through use of 3G conferencing as well as video-conferencing, but a high level of resourcing and internal technical expertise is required to make this happen. The work with BWYHG/Latitude also demonstrated the increasing importance of mobile communications with young people, but agencies do not yet have the capacity to take advantage of the many opportunities this offers for innovative forms of communication. Primary target: government and philanthropic agencies Secondary target: agencies A signicant nding of the project, supported by the ndings of the Productivity Commissions recent review of the not-for-prot sector, is that ICT is a signicant part of sector activity, but quite under-resourced by government. While further research needs to be undertaken, it is clear that there is a productivity dividend as well as a social dividend to be achieved through more effective resourcing, particularly of skills in information and knowledge management, as well as in decisionmaking for ICT futures. Answers can only come through close and collaborative work with the sector, rather than the imposition of solutions and products that derive from for-prot service models. One of the perceived difculties, however, is for philanthropic donors to move from a more traditional understanding of donor supportfor direct client supportto understanding that support for information, knowledge, and technical capacity will also lead to direct benets to clients. A positive and unintended consequence of the project was the increased awareness at Monash University of the nature of work carried out by the community sector and the potential for long-term collaborative community engagement.

Aim 7. To raise awareness by government, business and philanthropic foundations of the importance of supporting effective use of technology for the benet of disadvantaged people and their support organizations. This will lead to better resourcing of the community services sector.

16

Doing IT Better summary report

5. ACRONYMS
ACOSS BWYHG CCNR Australian Council of Social Service Baywest Youth Housing Group (now known as Latitude) Centre for Community Networking Research, Faculty of IT, Monash University Community services organization Information and communications technology Northcote Community Information & Support Service (now DIVRS Darebin Information, Volunteer & Resource Service) NPR, NFP Non-prot organization, not-for prot SCAAB RIAC VAADA YHAW VCOSS WHLM Springvale Community Aid and Advice Bureau Rural Information Advocacy Service Victorian Alcohol and Drug Association Youth Homelessness Alliance (Western) Victorian Council of Social Service Womens Health Loddon Mallee

CSO ICT NCISS

6. KEY TERMS
Community Development Community Development involves building or supporting the capacity of people to problemsolve independently. It is thus a eld of research and practice concerned with change and empowerment at the local community level, particularly of people and communities who are, in some way, seeking improvement to their lives. A eld of research and practice devoted to promoting the use of ICT for social change and development with CSOs and local communities, particularly using community development techniques. As dened by Etienne Wenger, a key proponent of ways of sharing knowledge, a Community of Practice is formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour: a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression, a group of engineers working on similar problems, a clique of pupils dening their identity in the school, a network of surgeons exploring novel techniques, a gathering of rst-time managers helping each other cope. Communities of Practice are found across many sectors, including government. CSOs are not-for-prot organizations that are directly engaged through both paid and non-paid (volunteer) activity in the provision of community advice and information, welfare, and related services for people in need. Part of the community sector. This is a widely used term to refer to the gap between ICT haves and have-nots, whether through lack of direct access to infrastructure such as computers of adequate connection, cost of equipment, or sufcient skills and training to take advantage of ICT. Disability or cultural and linguistic factors, such as the lack of support or content in minority or national languages, can also contribute to the divide. A further renement would be to add the lack of the soft skills which permit the effective use of ICT.

Community Informatics

Community of Practice

Community Service Organization Digital Divide

Doing IT Better summary report

17

Efciency

The measure of outputs that give the greatest benets for a given level of inputs available. Efciency can be interpreted in social terms (that is, the extent or degree to which social outputs are well-invested), or in a strict monetary sense (value for money). The extent of achievement of the stated objectives in a social or economic sense. The benets and costs to the community of a particular activity.

Effectiveness Impact

Information and The basket of both hardware and software that results in computers and telecommunications Communications (including mobile) systems. As well, ICT also involves the softer set of skills, knowledge, Technology information, and relationships that people use to build information structures and services in organizations and in their communications with people such as clients. Information/ Knowledge Management These terms are often used interchangeably, and sometimes separately. They are used to refer to the processes and techniques by which organizations characterize, organize, preserve, and transmit formal and informal knowledge, whether it is what people say, write or put on computers. Specialist elds, such as Archives and Records Management are also part of this eld. A quality of an information system that allows data collected for one particular set of purposes to be exported, transformed and re-presented for another set of purposes. Interoperability allows a user (such as a community services worker) to easily access and use data from multiple sources concurrently and seamlessly, or use elements from one set of data for different purposes.

Interoperability

Open Knowledge A set of principles and methodologies related to the production and distribution of knowledge works in an open manner. Knowledge is open if one is free to use, reuse, and redistribute it without legal, social or technological restriction. (ref: Wikipedia) Outcome The effects on a participant during or after their involvement in a program or activity conducted by a CSO in a not-for-prot activity. Outcomes can relate to knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, behaviour, condition or status. Outcomes can be positive (deliver a benet) or negative (impose a cost) on individuals. (ref: Productivity Commission 2010) The product of CSO activity (for example, the number of people trained in a program or the number of performances of a community orchestra). Outputs lead to outcomes and longerterm impacts. By Social Return on Investment (SROI), we mean the outcomes that affect the social well being of communities and the quality of life for individuals and families in them as well as social capital effects. Such outcomes are the result of investment in human, social, and business processes. The worldwide web as an interactive medium, with web applications that facilitate interactive information sharing, interoperability, user-centred design, and collaboration. Examples of Web 2.0 include web-based communities, hosted services, web applications, social-networking sites, video-sharing sites, wikis, blogs, mashups and folksonomies (user-generated taxonomies). A Web 2.0 site allows its users to interact with other users or to change website content, in contrast to non-interactive Web 1.0 websites where users are limited to the passive viewing of information that is provided to them (ref: Wikipedia). It extends not only to internet content, but to hand-held, mobile, wireless devices.

Output

Social Return on Investment

Web 2.0

18

Doing IT Better summary report

7. REFERENCES
Ferguson, H. (2008). Liquid Social Work: Welfare Interventions as Mobile Practices. British Journal of Social Work 38(3): 561-579. Infoxchange Australia (2009). Digital prociency in small to medium community services organisations. Melbourne, Infoxchange Australia. NCOSS (2008). Community Connexions. Addressing the Information & Communication Technology Needs of the NSW NGO Human Services Sector. Executive Summary. Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science 11(Jul/Aug): 404-428. Productivity Commission (2010). Contribution of the Not-for-Prot Sector. Research report. Canberra. Productivity Commission. Sen, A. K. (2001). Development as freedom. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Simpson, L. (2004). Big questions for community informatics initiatives: a social capital perspective. Community and Information Technology: The Big Questions. A Search Conference Report 19 October 2002. L. Stillman. Melbourne, Australian Scholarly Publishing. The Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd (2008). How many wheelchairs can you push at once? Productivity in the community service organisation sector in Victoria. Melbourne, The Allen Consulting Group. Victorian Council of Social Service (2009). Community Sector Sustainability: Background Paper. Melbourne, VCOSS.

Doing IT Better summary report

19

APPENDIX 1: PROJECT AIMS

1. To improve advocacy at the case level, enabling individual clients to acquire technological skills and to become independent and take control of their lives. 2. To lead to better support of people in their interactions with government agencies such as social security agency Centrelink or in teaching them how to apply for jobs online. 3. To help organizations to overcome client and worker fears of technology and aversion to acquisition of computer skills. 4. To set in place mechanisms to train organizations to better manage the computer facilities they have. 5. To help people who work and volunteer in community organizations to become better users of the technology themselves, and to pass on their knowledge to other people. 6. To enable CSOs to use new, timesaving forms of communications, such as video conferencing, or internet phone services which can bring together workers and clients who may be scattered across large distanceseffectively expanding services to those who may not otherwise have access. 7. To raise awareness in government, business, and philanthropic foundations of the importance of supporting effective use of technology for the benet of disadvantaged people and their support organizations. This will lead to better resourcing of the community services sector.

20

Doing IT Better summary report

APPENDIX 2: PROJECT STRATEGIES

The project used a number of key strategies to meet its aims of research, capacity-building, advocacy and community development. Signicantly, prior to the project, there was no sector-focused analysis or sectorbased group to provide a cohesive voice on the issues. Doing IT Betters approach has enabled this to occur. The primary strategy was action research via indepth case studies with a range of community service organizations (CSOs), each developed with the close collaboration of the target organizations workers as research partners. The case studies illuminated the different effects of ICT on Victorian CSOs. The range and depth of evidence they collected is highly illustrative of problems in information and knowledge management and planning for ICT change and education. Numerous other strategies were used to pursue the capacity-building, advocacy, and communitydevelopment objectives: workshops, seminars and specialist workshops for the community sector on a wide range of issues to do with ICT and community services; the formation of a working group concerned with the systemic problem of data interoperability issues in agencies, particularly those in the human services area; annual conferences focusing on particular issues emerging from the project; publication of reports and academic papers about project outcomes; ongoing advocacy to government, other funders and higher education about sector needs; and development of funding applications for innovative projects with individual organizations, as well as for academic research funding. A key guiding principle of the project has been that of collective Open Knowledgeas distinct from individualistic private or corporate knowledge. The principle of Open Knowledge is like that of the Open Source Software movement: that collaboration and knowledge sharing is the most effective way to build robustness. It is particularly relevant to the community services sector because collaboration is a key value and a common way of working. Participation As an action research project, the success of Doing IT Better hinged on the participation of its target group CSOs and other key stakeholders. At the same time, decisive leadership and exible decisionmaking was required. Accordingly a three-layered structure was used to maximise participation while allowing for transparent, accountable decision-making, leadership and planning. The Community of Practice was the primary stakeholder group. It comprised people from CSOs (its primary constituency), as well as the private sector (such as community-oriented ICT service providers), government

Doing IT Better summary report

21

departments, academics and other interested parties. Members were involved to different degrees according to their preference. Some were active in many aspects of the project; others just kept themselves informed about what was happening. Some became more involved as issues of particular relevance arose. The Community of Practice was somewhat loosely dened, but is considered to have comprised the 370 or so people who subscribed to the email list over the life of the project. The Reference Group comprised up to eight members. Its role was to be a sounding board, advisory group, and bank of community sector practice wisdom. Meeting bimonthly with the project team, it discussed project progress, planning, and issues. In this way, the project team remained accountable to its primary stakeholders. The Reference Group also became a resource in itself as it developed over the life of the project into a collaborative knowledge-sharing, problem solving, and advocacy body on issues concerning CSOs and their use of ICT. The Reference Group comprised: Pere Ruka (Mackillop Family Services), Elaine Cope (ICT Matters), Jason King (consultant), Professor Ron Weber (Monash University), Michelle Alchin (City of Port Phillip), Jinny McGrath (Springvale Community Aid & Advice Bureau), Matthew Colledan (Norwood Association), Monique Cosgrove (City of Port Phillip), Natalie Collins (Infoxchange Australia), and Carolyn Cartwright (City of Hobsons Bay).

The project Steering Group was responsible for overall project management: securing funding, managing the budget, authorising expenditure, approving and monitoring the workplan, and making major decisions. The Steering Group considered the advice of the Reference Group in decisionmaking recognizing the Reference Groups practical expertise and understanding of the environment in which CSOs operate. The Steering Group comprised the two core project workers (Larry Stillman from CCNR, and Dean Lombard from VCOSS) as well as the CCNR Director (Graeme Johanson) and the VCOSS Sector Development Manager (Marina Henley). Cath Smith (VCOSS CEO) and Tom Denison (CCNR) also participated from time to time.

22

Doing IT Better summary report

APPENDIX 3: PROJECT RATIONALE

The rapid spread of information and communications technology (ICT) into every facet of work and social life threatens to increase the divide between the haves and have nots of Australian society. People in need depend upon information and knowledge held and transmitted by community sector organizations (CSOs). If the sectors ICT capacity is not supported, then the digital divide between government and the disadvantaged or vulnerable people it serves will increase. ICT is increasingly part of the way that CSOs work; the provision of information and support to clients and the accountability and funding relationship between CSOs and government are dependent on good electronic services. Thus their inability to use ICT effectively leads to waste and inefciency that affects their capacity to provide quality services to clients. Given that these organizations play a critical role in direct support to marginalised and disadvantaged people (who may be homeless, unemployed, under-skilled, chronically ill, or otherwise in need), the ICT skills gap has serious social justice ramications. This view is conrmed by research by other sector organizations (NCOSS 2008; Infoxchange Australia 2009). Early this year the Productivity Commission published its research report: Contribution of the Not-for Prot Sector. Much of the report is very relevant to problems taken up in the Doing IT Better Project, and key issues are discussed here. The Commission is alert to the way that ICTs underpin sector productivity, but also that signicant investment is required to bring the sector up to standard, suggesting that: To take advantage of ICT opportunities NFPs need the resources funding and skills to develop, purchase and implement ICT solutions. They have to see that such investments will bring about not just productivity improvements but better outcomes for workers, members, participant or clients. (Productivity Commission 2010: 231). However, the Productivity Commission report still takes a traditional view of technology, with just a limited focus on the web of cultural and informational interactions (sometimes called soft technology (Simpson 2004)) that is as signicant as access to the technical artifacts (the boxes and wires). Thus, while the report talks about the importance of knowledge systems, and the need for what it calls a shared client management and record management system (ibid., 232), there is an unstated assumption that the problem is just technological. In fact, the problem is as much about how to provide a sustainable skills base in information and knowledge management or ICT planning in the sector. A broader understanding of how ICT works, informed by internationally-recognized research into socialtechnical problems around information, knowledge, and technology (Orlikowski 2000), would have helped the Productivity Commission appreciate that the problem is not just about boxes and wires and more funding, but also the articulation, understanding, and support of the complex ways in which new forms of information and knowledge management are an essential part of community service work. Today this includes the creation and distribution of information for client service, reporting, policy and procedure development, and other purposes.

Doing IT Better summary report

23

Through that perspective, the project has highlighted the role of the community service worker as an information mediator or knowledge and information worker, whose skill base will be enhanced by familiarity with the principles and practices of information and knowledge in addition to more conventional hardware issues. However, there is a difculty in assessing, at least in the short term, the impact of investment in such things as information management skills, because community outcomes and impacts are often intangibles, such as social engagement, condence, or perceptions of living better. Thus, how do you measure happiness? The Productivity Commission takes up the issue of what it calls impacts, as distinct from outcomes, based on OECD research (Appendix B to the Productivity Commission Report), and these are longer term and feedback effects of activities that are not always trackable or subject to evaluation through a discrete measure. In fact, the desire for single magic bullet measures, complete sets of social indicators, or perfect causal pathways can lead to quite erroneous ndings based on imperfect or erroneous assumptions. The report notes that impact is hard to meaningfully measure because of the difculties of demonstrating cause, the diffuseness of data and the absence of concrete units or benchmarks. Unlike controllable survey research, there is no gold standard (such as well-funded medical trials) for this type of work. But surrogate indicators can be used. This is why good case studies, as reported upon here, are so important, particularly if the sector has the opportunity to engage in rigorous and intelligent discussion and learning. To again quote the Productivity Commission: Case studies provide insights into the contribution of NFPs activities to outcomes and impacts. Meta analysis of a range of such studies improves condence in the conclusions drawn and can provide benchmark measures that are representative of the sector more generally.many of the sectors

contributions are intangible in nature and hence not readily amenable to quantication, so only a subset of outcomes and impacts may be able to be valued in dollar terms. As a result, a range of qualitative and proxy measures must be accommodated in the framework (ibid. 36). This is an important counterpoint to some of the somewhat nave economic rationalist and utilitarian approaches to understanding and measuring social and human capital. This is an approach which has been inuential in government, though based on narrow modeling of human behaviour. Amartya Sen, the Nobelprize winning economist, has clearly established that this approach excludes highly relevant information from its calculations of human action and outcomes, including the considerations of people in need (Sen 2001). Thus careful use of case studies and accompanying data can provide rigorous data about a new approach to understanding investment and outcomes for sceptical government funders and others, such as philanthropic donors, who are concerned that their valuable nancial investments are productively and responsibly used. The complexity of demonstrating impacts in welfare and community work also affects how ICT investments in the sector can be assessed. As Allen Consulting also made clear in a recent report for VCOSS, further productivity gains for the sectoralready difcult in the provision of people-centered servicesrequire further investment in ICT. However, the programcentric funding model that predominates in the CSO sector does not adequately fund whole-of-organisation technology or the people-systems and knowledge to support that technology. Ultimately, as Sen suggests, such a pervasively narrow approach constricts policy and practice supporting human development. Indeed, the requirement to conform to industry standards, as well as mandatory electronic reporting, means that many organizations have to sacrice funds from other areas of operation (such as direct client service), thereby negatively impacting their capacity for effective service delivery (The Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd 2008; Victorian Council of Social Service 2009).

24

Doing IT Better summary report

VCOSS, supported by the Monash research, argues that community sector strengthening is dependent upon the effective use and the sustainability of ICT infrastructure in the sector, and this is a nding paralleled in a recent report of the New South Wales Council of Social Service (NCOSS), where issues such as shared training and support, data sharing and interoperability, assistance with contracting support services, and the need for realistic ICT infrastructure support are part of a series of recommendations for the sector in NSW. The recently published report of Infoxchange Australia, based on an audit of 120 small-to-medium sized funded organizations funded by the Victorian Department of Human Services, also conrms many of the ndings and recommendations of this report. Remarkably, only two out of the 120 organizations were currently working on an ICT plan, and 84 per cent reported that they had no plan at all. It also found many organizations underestimate their ICT spend or do not take into account additional costs such as that of telecommunications (Infoxchange Australia 2009: 14). It is clear from the information and management aspects of the effective use of ICTs and the cultural issues around ICT adoption and adaptation that longterm investment in the soft end of ICTpeople and machineryis critical for sector sustainability in this time of increased demand for social services. As the Productivity Commission has also suggested, governments and other funders need to invest longterm to underpin the transformation of the sector. Governments have an additional responsibility, given they require so much reporting and accountability from organizations delivering social programs on their behalf.

The project also highlights the potential for fruitful and cooperative research between the community sector and higher education. This brings a high level of expertise and funding together to support the community sector, not just in Victoria, but nationwide, and in many areas other than IT. This point has not been lost also by the Productivity Commission, saying in its report that a Cooperative Research Centre program: [S]hould facilitate applications by collaborations of not-forprot organizations (including universities), government agencies and businesses in the areas of social innovation by: actively promoting the opportunities that are now available providing specialized advice and facilitation support to organizations expressing interest but lacking the knowledge and resources to develop the partnerships required. (Productivity Commission 2010: Recommendation 9.4)

Doing IT Better summary report

25

APPENDIX 4: ENDORSEMENT BY DOING IT BETTER REFERENCE GROUP

We are very pleased to present and endorse this report of the Doing IT Better project. As people who are both committed to the work and welfare of the community services sector and cognisant of the value of ICT in supporting and improving the sectors effectiveness, it has been an honour and a privilege to have contributed to the work of the project by serving on the Reference Group. One of the most signicant aspects of the project has been its breadth: rarely have we have seen research and capacity-building work operating concurrently on so many fronts. This multi-faceted approach has been one of the hallmarks of Doing IT Better and, by linking research ndings and community-building with action and advocacy, has been a key part of the projects success. Because of this, it is difcult to summarize the work and outcomes of the project in a paragraph or two. Rather, by considering each key element of the project in turn, along with feedback from CSO staff who participated, a multi-dimensional picture emerges that reveals both the remarkable ground covered by the work and the real impact it has had on the sector. Seminar series The information seminar series that ran from early 2008 to the end of 2009 has had an enormous impact. The 13 seminars on topics as diverse as disaster recovery, information management, innovative technologies, needs assessments and strategic planning addressed most of the key ICT issues that community service organisations (CSOs) are struggling with in their daily work. Feedback from those who attended was not only overwhelmingly positive; it also indicated that the seminars had been particularly empowering, often playing a key role in informing CSOs planning processes and purchasing decisions. The fact that most seminar presenters were drawn from the target group was particularly afrming for the sector. I found the recent seminar presentations on IT Innovations in the Community Sector very informative and the ideas presented will help our organisation form ideas as we move forward.
Geoff Willett, Manager Corporate Services, Quantum Support Services

Virtualisation and reducing carbon footprints is critical to all organisations, so the seminar in August was very benecial. Knowledge Management (KM) is our rst priority and we are about to formally kick-off our KM Project for this year, so the seminar in October will be invaluable for many in the Project Team.
Rod Rankin, IT Services Manager, St Lukes Anglicare

I just wanted to pass on my personal thanks to you for organising such an interesting and informative seminar. It is the rst we have attended and, as a small Neighbourhood House, we dont usually have access to such thorough information. We have already started thinking about our IT Plan since Thursday and I am feeling more secure that we are reasonably prepared and can now formalise our plan in writing.
Marilyn Pelman, Manager, Mt Eliza Village Neighbourhood Centre

Case studies The intensive case studies carried out by the Monash University team have had far-reaching benets for most of the agencies involved. The inclusive process used has been empowering for agency staff, enabling them to build on the work undertaken and take a more proactive and clear-sighted approach to integrating information technology appropriately into their work. In many cases new projects and successful funding applications have followed their engagement with the case study team. Findings from the case studies also guided our choice of topics for the seminar series, and may explain the much higher attendance rates (average of about 50 people) in the second series.

26

Doing IT Better summary report

The process used by the Doing IT Better team in the case study was very empowering and inclusive. It was not a group of experts trying to impose their ideas it was a process that started from trying to understand our issues and involving people all along the way in coming to solutions with the team sharing their knowledge with us. This has led to a very positive change management process.
Jinny McGrath, Program Manager, Springvale Community Aid and Advice Bureau

The Doing IT Better project has helped us connect with knowledge and ideas to build our organisational IT capacity; that in turn enables us to deliver better services to travellers in need. The seminars have provided us with the opportunity to network with other not-for-prots and IT professionals, and to consider solutions that t our budget and needs.
Jodie Willmer, Chief Executive Ofcer, Travellers Aid

moved more fully to an electronic framework but, prior to the Doing IT Better interoperability project, there was no sector-focused analysis or cohesive voice on the issue. The projects Interoperability Working Group has not only described the problems in detail and devised practical solutions; it has also proactively engaged government and the academic sector to begin making those solutions a reality. While there is still quite some way to go, the fact that the issue is on the map at all in the sector is testament to the effectiveness of this aspect of the project. [The] Interoperability Working Group has played a catalytic role in highlighting some of the complex information and data management problems confronting Community Service Organisations and the Community sector as a whole. I was particularly grateful for the support levelled by [Doing IT Better] when the Victorian Governments Ofce for the Community Sector decided to follow up some of the ideas [from] the Interoperability Forum held on the 5th March 2009.
Richard Vines, Quality/Knowledge Manager, Childrens Protection Society

Conferences The annual Doing IT Better conferences have been fundamental to the success of the project. The rst, in 2007, attracted the attention of many IT-savvy people in the sector and thus served to build a core interest group that was instrumental in bringing the project to the attention of the wider sector. It also set the scene for the rest of the project by identifying the issues that needed to be addressed. The second conference enabled rich discussion of emerging ideas about how best to support the sectors ICT needs providing a framework for future projects. It also served as a catalyst for comprehensive and focused work on interoperability and date exchange issues. The 2009 conference highlighted the critical issue of IT education for community services workers and has initiated a dialogue between the education and community sector that is still ongoing. It also played a signicant role in engaging the Neighbourhood House sector with the project. Driving systemic change One of the most signicant achievements of the project has been to highlight and make progress on the problems of multiple data entry and lack of data interoperability. These problems have plagued the community sector for decades and become worse in recent years as data collection and quality assurance

Networking One of the more enduring outcomes of the project looks to be the Community of Practice that has formed around it. The numerous activities and events that Doing IT Better has convened have brought together people from across the community sector who have either expertise in or consciousness of the value of ICT. This network is beginning to have a life of its own as a facilitator of knowledge sharing and alliance building, and is now well placed to support future ICT initiatives in the sector. The Doing IT Better project gives us access to affordable information and resources including people that we dont have the time, funds or networks to nd for ourselves.
Angela Savage, Executive Ofcer, Association of Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres

Doing IT Better summary report

27

Doing IT Better has put me in touch with great contacts and they are very supportive and welcoming to me. All of my career had been spent working in global commercial organisations and these contacts have made my transition into the community and social sector a lot easier. I have been able to quickly switch-on to important issues for our organisation and help to prioritise them properly.
Rod Rankin, IT Services Manager, St Lukes Anglicare

We have found the information, support and networking provided by the Doing IT Better project to be extremely useful for our not-for-prot community organisation. Its the kind of practical, tailored support service that the Victorian NFP sector needs.
Liz Morgan, Manager, Public Interest Law Clearing House

Vision Greater discussion and awareness of ICT issues around the sector has led to a noticeable change in the way the sector views ICT. It is no coincidence that the best seminar attendance and follow-up discussion was to do with ICT strategic planning. There is a growing recognition in the sector that ICT infrastructure is fundamental, not incidental, and this has coincided with the growing engagement of the sector with Doing IT Better. Similarly, the increased readiness within the sector to embrace new technologies appears to be connected with greater awareness of the technologies as well as the existence of forums in which to seek advice and support both of which were facilitated by the project. ANHLCs involvement in Doing IT Better has given us a vision of how our organisation can become more effective and efcient for example, by implementing systems to enable streamlining and/or automation of mundane tasks and freeing up staff time for more interesting and strategic work.
Angela Savage, Executive Ofcer, Association of Neighbourhood Houses and Learning Centres

Raising the prole of issues with government Doing IT Better has made considerable progress toward raising the prole of community sector ICT issues with government. This has been most evident in the area of information and quality systems the Ofce for the Community Sector undertook a quality assurance data mapping pilot project as a direct result of issues raised at the Doing IT Better Interoperability Forum in March 2009 but there are a number of other indicators, including: Multimedia Victoria launching its Collaborative Internet Innovation Fund (cIIF) at a Doing IT Better event, and subsequently sponsoring the 2009 seminar series; Ofce for the Community Sector staff attending numerous Doing IT Better events as well as other community ICT-focused events such as the Making Links and Connecting Up conferences; and Department of Planning and Community Development indicating an interest in funding ICT-capacity building work in the Victorian community sector. All of this activity has brought considerable benet to individual organisations and the sector as a whole. At the same time it has enabled the project team to very clearly understand the obstacles between the CSO sector and ICT sustainability, and envision what must be put in place to overcome them. The project recommendations outline these necessary initiatives in broad terms, and the project team continues to esh out the details and explore opportunities to secure resources for the work that needs to be done. All in all, we consider the project to have been a signicant success in terms of achieving concrete outcomes and laying the groundwork for future work. It has been a privilege to participate in this work and we look forward to future work in this area with Monash University. Doing It Better Reference Group.

As an IT practitioner with 25 years commercial experience I view this project as one of the most important inuences on improving IT practice within the not for prot sector. Keep up the good work.
Peter Anderson, IT Consultant, Centacare Catholic Family Services

28

Doing IT Better summary report