Rachel Herring, Middlesex University

AERC Alcohol Academy Launch Event 9th June 2009

Brief backgroundDevolution of the responsibility to local

authorities for action to address alcohol-related harm and help achieve national targets.

Use of partnerships as a mechanism for developing and implementing local alcohol policies e.g. CDRPs, DA(A)Ts, PCTs, LSPs (and LAAs).

GORs have a supporting role.Alcohol as a cross cutting issue – health,

criminal justice, community safety, commerce.

What is partnership? “An agreement between two or more

independent bodies to work collectively to achieve an objective” (Audit Commission , 1998, 2005)

Vary in size, service area, membership and function:

Statutory e.g. CDRP and voluntary e.g. LSPStrategic/operationalMicro-partnershipsInformal (‘organic) rather than formal (invented)?

Why work in partnership?

Multi-component approach Strategic framework with a theoretical basis for action The identification of problems defined at local levels Programme of co-ordinated projects based on a integrative

programme design where singular interventions run in combination with each other and/or are sequenced together over time

Identification, mobilisation and coordination of agencies, stakeholders and local communities

Defined aims, objectives, indicators & measures of effectiveness for the programme as a whole (individual projects will also have specified aims, objectives and outcome measures).

Evaluation as an integral part of the programme

Source: Thom and Bayley (2007)

Key issuesPolicy tensions Transference Alcohol-focused or embedded approachesCommunity mobilisationInstitutionalising change (sustainability)

Evaluation of the LSPs: governance issues

Considerable differences in the extent to which LSPs had been able to establish robust and sustainable governance arrangements

previous history of partnership working different kinds of local authority areasleadership, membership, need for a clear

understanding of the role and purpose of the partnership

engagement of partners and stakeholders

Evaluation of LSPs: delivery issuesPrime drivers of activity were national policies Wide range of activityClear relationship between the ‘maturity’ of the

LSP and the amount of progress madeMainstreaming: ‘strategic’ and ‘initiative’:

• LA, police and health organisations are key players • Area based initiatives e.g. NRF provide a stimulus

& learning tool• Importance of councillors, senior officers & middle

management • ‘Locality’ planning good place for main programme

reshaping

The Virtuous Circle (Geddes, 2006)

The Vicious Circle (Geddes, 2006)

Key factorsIndividualsChampionsAchieving ‘buy-in’ at all levelsCulturesTime pressuresComplexity of policy context Sustainability

Addressing alcohol-related harm: lessons from other fieldsLong term commitment Ownership of the problemFraming the problemUnderstanding the targetPlanningPositive messagesMultiple approachesCompetitionResearch

ReadingAudit Commission (2005) Governing partnerships. Bridging

the accountability gap. London: Audit Commission. Audit Commission (2009) Working Better together? Managing

local strategic partnerships. London: Audit Commission.Geddes, M. (2006) National Evaluation of Local Strategic

Partnerships. Theory of Change Paper Issues Paper. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.

Stead, M. et al (2009) Changing attitudes, knowledge and behaviour. A review of successful initiatives. York: JRF.

Thom, B. and Bayley, M. (2007) Multi-component programmes: An approach to prevent and reduce alcohol-related harm. York: JRF

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Department for Transport (2006) National Evaluation of Local Strategic Partnerships: Formative Evaluation and Action Research 2002-2005. Executive Summary to Final Report Programme. Wetherby : ODPM Publications.