The case of a social partnership in a Canadian province

To this end, we suggest that some discussion at the Large Committee (roundtable) about the role of the Coordinator and the sub-committees might address some of the dissonance we found among participants in our study about who drives the agenda of the organization and to whom STOPS is accountable to. [...] In the early 1990s, communities, frustrated by their persistent unmet needs and the perceived incapacity of the provincial government to address their issues in any meaningful and systemic way, responded by organizing into “partnerships.” The language of partnership is often used to denote the reciprocal arrangement between the government and the community to address social needs (Balloch and Tayl [...] Indeed, the vision statement of the PPCFV reflects these motivations: People working together in a different and more productive way for the purpose of eliminating violence/abuse in the individual, the family, the community, and the nation so that we can live a safe, secure and valued life (Geller and Zwart, 1997: 5). [...] This foundation is central to the processes adopted by the PPCFV and later, by STOPS-to-Violence in that it stresses the value of the whole human being as well as the range of needs of the organization, including mental, physical, spiritual and emotional. [...] In the past, STOPS and the PPCFV have relied heavily on the work of the Coordinator to ensure that the provincial roundtable members continue to meet and that the various committees carry out their functions.