A study on Guidelines for upgrading sub-district social assistance centers to improve the quality of life of vulnerable groups while eradicating the poverty.

Abstract

The objectives are: 1) To study the mechanisms for mobilizing and operation of the social assistance centers in order to develop as pilot sites for social and quality of life development; 2) To explore participatory approaches in enhancing community social assistance centers; and 3) To plan and formulate policy recommendations and guidelines for the establishment and management of sub-district social assistance centers using participatory approaches. This study used Mixed-methods research combines qualitative and quantitative methods.

            Subdistrict Social Assistance Center was established based on the concept of one-stop integrated social service delivery and community-based service provision, in accordance with the local level mission and responsibilities of the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security, for improving the quality of life of vulnerable groups and the general population. The center emphasizes integrated cooperation from all sectors in its establishment and co-management. However, the approaches to establishment and management remain unclear, preventing this mechanism from operating in alignment with its founding objectives. Therefore, a study is required to examine approaches for enhancement based on model centers in the study area covering 8 upper northern Thailand provinces: Chiang Mai, Lamphun, Lampang, Mae Hong Son, Chiang Rai, Phayao, Phrae, and Nan. A total of 24 centers that have demonstrated effective operations according to operational standards will serve as pilot sites for scaling up to other centers in the future.

                  The average operational level of the sub-district social assistance centers was found that overall; it was at a high level with an average score of 3.76, especially the environment arrangement, which had the highest average score of 3.87 for the operational management, followed by the integration of cooperation, which had an average score of 3.76. The mechanism for activities and services management had similar average scores of 3.74 and 3.73, respectively. The quality of services had an average score of 3.68. Moreover, there was a framework and method for preparation of plans, projects and activities for mobilizing the sub-district social assistance centers for vulnerable groups and local people that can be used for planning or preparing the resolution and assistance for the sub-district social assistance centers, and their operations at every step in order to help vulnerable groups in the area and refer to relevant organizations. Moreover, The study revealed key strengths including: A diverse network of partners and a committee/working group with high professional expertise. Key strengths include the promotion of vocational skills and practical, "out-of-classroom" knowledge. Furthermore, personnel are well-prepared to provide services and activities, supported by suitable facilities and strong commitment from local executives. Weaknesses: A primary challenge is that the committee and working group still lack a clear understanding of their roles, the center’s origins, and operational guidelines. There is a notable lack of budget support, with local administrative organizations acting as the sole primary drivers. Additionally, responsible staff are overburdened with multiple tasks, and the general public remains unfamiliar with the center’s role and importance.Opportunities: The center has the potential to thrive through cooperation from various sectors willing to provide resources and integrate their operations. Community welfare funds and other local mechanisms serve as vital tools for improving the quality of life for vulnerable groups. Moreover, the civil society sector has shown significant interest in establishing community-based social assistance centers. Threats: The establishment of the center often overlaps with existing local mechanisms, leading to redundancy. A significant barrier is the public's dependency on government welfare; many citizens expect financial aid and consumer goods rather than self-reliance. Furthermore, frequent changes in government policies result in a lack of operational continuity, exacerbated by limited budgets and resources.

      The guidelines for enhancing the participatory approaches: 1)Planning and formulating the policy for mobilizing the sub-district social assistance centers to have clear and non-overlapping missions 2) Preparing regulations or laws to support the establishment of sub-district social assistance centers 3) Continuously developing the potential of the committee/working group of the sub-district social assistance centers 4) Applying lesson learned from the previous operations and 5) Coordinating with all sectors to participate in developing the quality of life of vulnerable groups.

            Research recommendations are categorized into two levels: policy-level proposals and operational guidelines. The policy recommendations for Sub-district Social Assistance Centers include: 1) The Ministry of Social Development and Human Security shall prepare regulations or laws to support the establishment of sub-district social assistance centers 2) Emphasize the importance of mobilizing the sub-district social assistance centers 3) Budget allocation in order to develop the potential of the committee/working group of the sub-district social assistance centers and 4) support prototype projects/areas to be applied to other places. The establishment and management approaches for local administrative organizations or civil society groups intending to establish a sub-district social assistance centers  include: 1) Selection of committee/working group members should include relevant network partners from government, private sector, civil society, and volunteers, with formal appointment orders issued and role clarification for each position; 2) Definition of mission and responsibilities should establish operational guidelines emphasizing comprehensive assistance to target groups across all dimensions, implementing a referral system to relevant agencies, providing welfare coverage for target groups, serving as a central hub for collaborative integration, publicizing operations, monitoring, evaluating and reporting to stakeholders, and documenting lessons learned; 3) Preparation of appropriate facilities should ensure convenient access, favorable environment, adequate service space, center signage, designated reception points, and flowcharts of complaint reception procedures; 4) Development of complaint reception processes should include recording information in complaint registries, conducting field investigations to verify facts, analyzing problems and needs, coordinating referrals for comprehensive assistance, documenting assistance outcomes, and reporting results to stakeholders; 5) Establishment of operational standards should incorporate 5 components: activities and services, operational mechanisms and management, collaborative integration, service quality, and environmental arrangements. Recommendations for future research include investigating approaches for capacity development, job creation, and livelihood generation for vulnerable groups in communities under the Community Social Assistance Center's operations to achieve long-term self-reliance, and approaches for promoting community participation in housing development for vulnerable groups.