Collaborative partnerships for better community outcomes
Effective social infrastructure assets support high-quality service delivery. To be successful, their planning and delivery must be coordinated and fostered by collaborative and inclusive partnerships.
Ideally, these will look beyond physical assets and direct services to understand the holistic contribution social infrastructure makes to wellbeing and liveability for the whole community.
However, because a wide range of social services serve communities, the supporting infrastructure is usually planned, delivered and maintained by different agencies.
With community service needs changing in Australia, social infrastructure providers should collaborate across governments and sectors to apply strategies that achieve the best possible solution for each place.
A coordinated approach to planning and delivery based on providing what communities need will deliver better outcomes than the conventional approach of standalone decisions. These approaches will provide all Australians with access to the right services, no matter where they live.
The result will be social infrastructure that is more connected, well used and highly valued by the community.
Productivity, learning and job creation will be driven by co-locating major health and education facilities in mixed-use precincts.
To support these partnerships, there must be governance frameworks that reject disconnected, business-as-usual approaches and put community needs first.
The Australian Government and state and territory governments also need to embrace different funding and delivery models, such as:
• outcomes-based procurement, which encourages innovation by focusing on achieving outcomes, not on how they are achieved
• Public Private Partnerships that share costs and risks.
As well as delivering significant cost savings, alternative models can fund shared community use facilities and improve delivery outcomes.
Specialised infrastructure agencies should also be established within social infrastructure portfolios to improve delivery competence. These agencies would manage significant capital programs for health and education and be supported by standalone capital project offices.
8.2 Recommendation Maximise social and economic community benefits by supporting shared use of social infrastructure through future agreements and capital funding programs prioritising shared use of facilities. Proposed sponsors: Department of Health, Department of Education, Skills and Employment, Australian Treasury Supported by: State and territory treasuries, state and territory planning departments, state and territory health departments, state and territory education departments | ||||
When this should impact: |
| Where this should impact: |
| |
| 8.2.1 Allow community access outside core operating hours by developing shared-use plans for new and upgraded social infrastructure such as health facilities, schools, VET, TAFE, universities and sporting facilities. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure bodies | |||
| Support shared use of social infrastructure by establishing national principles for place-based, cross-agency infrastructure governance. Proposed lead: Infrastructure Australia Supported by: State and territory infrastructure bodies | |||
| Promote shared use of social infrastructure by developing incentives and measures that support agencies to implement shared- use arrangements and place-based, collaborative planning and delivery. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure bodies | |||
| Increase community access to social infrastructure by benchmarking, compiling and sharing best-practice examples of shared-use models that could be adapted or scaled nationally. Proposed lead: Infrastructure Australia Supported by: State and territory infrastructure bodies | |||
| Enable place-centric TAFE developments by developing principles to support this approach, including collaborative and shared-use opportunities. Review existing TAFE assets against these principles and migrate new or refurbished assets where there are benefits. Proposed lead: State and territory education departments and state and territory planning departments Supported by: State and territory treasuries | |||
| Enable the use of infrastructure during crises by identifying and funding fit-for- purpose facilities that would be available for rapid multi-purposing and shared use at these times. Proposed lead: State and territory emergency management agencies Supported by: State and territory treasuries | |||
| Support third-party use by establishing insurance and security arrangements, payment systems and associated services. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure bodies | |||
| Enable a shift in agencies adopting shared- use models by including principles for maximising shared use and associated community outcomes in business case policies. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory infrastructure bodies | |||
| 8.2.2 Increase economic and social benefits by implementing strategic planning governance structures for health and education precincts, and innovative procurement and delivery models. Specialised agencies should also be established to deliver major social infrastructure capital projects. Proposed lead: State and territory health departments, state and territory education departments, state and territory treasuries, state and territory first minister's departments Supported by: Department of Health, Department of Education, Skills and Employment, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, universities, local governments, local health districts, local education officers | |||
| Drive the development of health and education precincts and innovation districts by developing and implementing place-based governance agreements that involve associated local institutions and community representatives. Proposed lead: State and territory health departments, state and territory education departments Supported by: State and territory planning departments, universities | |||
| Yield the benefits of innovation districts by adopting a precinct maturity model to: • assess the maturity of existing health and education precincts • prioritise precincts to move along the precinct maturity pathway • develop investment attraction strategies, master plans and incentives to attract aligned industry sectors into precincts • include social and affordable rental housing in innovation districts. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: State and territory health departments, state and territory education departments, state and territory economic development departments, universities | |||
| Promote and accommodate innovative approaches to procuring social infrastructure delivery services, including updating existing Public Private Partnership guidelines and models. Proposed lead: State and territory treasuries Supported by: Infrastructure Australia | |||
| Deliver better capital outcomes by establishing standalone infrastructure agencies and major project offices for significant social infrastructure sector portfolios. Proposed lead: State and territory first minister's departments Supported by: State and territory health departments, state and territory education departments | |||
Measuring progress
| Shared use framework Deployment of common principles for place-based, cross-agency infrastructure governance | ||
Governance | Target: National | Timeframe: |
|
| Integrated innovation precincts Percentage of Fast-growing Cities and Smaller Cities with integrated social infrastructure innovation precincts | ||
Economic | Target: 100% | Timeframe: |
|
| Innovative social infrastructure Public Private Partnership guidelines include innovative approaches for social infrastructure delivery | ||
Governance | Target: National | Timeframe: |
|
| Social infrastructure assets Standalone infrastructure agency, and major project office, responsible for social infrastructure delivery in every jurisdiction | ||
Governance | Target: National | Timeframe: |
|
