Please answer the question according to the following case

How has WAYS adapted its programs and services to meet the changing needs of the communities it serves, and what factors have influenced these decisions?

WESTERN AREA YOUTH SERVICES

Brenda Hall, executive director of Western Area Youth Services (WAYS), sat in her office pondering the case of dj vu she was experiencing. At its September 2000 meeting, the board of directors spent a great deal of time discussing the implications of a significant potential liability for staff salaries. A merger was identified as a possible solution, and Hall was instructed by the board to begin the process of seeking a possible merger partner for the agency. It didnt seem that long ago that Hall had been through the merger that had created WAYS, a childrens mental health centre located in London, Ontario. Hall wondered how she might initiate the process on behalf of her board and what she should be looking for in a potential partner. She also wondered how a merger might benefit the agency at this point in time. THE CMHO AND THE STATE OF CHILDRENS MENTAL HEALTH The Childrens Mental Health Organization (CMHO) was established in 1972 as a member organization to promote the mental health and well-being of children and youth and their families in Ontario. Its member organizations served children and youth from birth to age 18. The organizations primary goals were to promote service excellence and innovation in its member organizations through accreditation and to advocate for policies, programs and funds to improve the state of childrens mental health. According to CMHO, about 500,000 children in Ontario, about 18 per cent of Ontarios children, had psychiatric disorders in 1999. Its 90 member organizations served over 120,000 children with extremely high levels of emotional disorder. Another 7,000 children were on waiting lists for services, with an average wait time of six months. The average annual cost of service in a childrens mental health centre was Cdn$2,500 per child. In the 19952000 time period, government funding to childrens mental health centres was cut by eight per cent while the number of children served increased by 75 per cent. At the same time, childrens mental health issues became more extreme; for example, the rate of youth suicide increased 400 per cent from the 1970s. CMHO believed that the treatment programs of its member organizations worked. Data collected by the organization between April 1991 and June 1995 showed that treatment in childrens mental health centres was associated with a reduction in aggression, violence, opposition to authority and hyperactivity; a reduction in severe anxiety, worry, depression and low self-esteem; and a reduction in poor social relations, both at home and at school. According to CMHO, Ontarios future depended on its government making childrens mental health a priority, through both its policies and its funding decisions. Mary Heisz prepared this case to provide material for class discussion. The author does not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The author may have disguised certain names and other identifying information to protect confidentiality. Ivey Management Services prohibits any form of reproduction, storage or transmittal without its written permission. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Management Services, c/o Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 3K7; phone (519) 661-3208; fax (519) 661-3882; e-mail cases@ivey.uwo.ca. Copyright 2001, Ivey Management Services Version: (A) 2009-12-01. FORMATION OF WAYS WAYS was formed in July 1996 as a result of the amalgamation of three agenciesBelton House, Hardy Geddes House and Mission Services of Londons Teen Girls Home. WAYS was incorporated under the Canada Corporations Act as a not-for-profit organization and was a registered charity under the Canadian Income Tax Act. It was also a member of CMHO. Brenda Hall was the executive director of Belton House at the time of the amalgamation, and she recalled that the process of merging the three agencies was a difficult and, at times,

acrimonious process for board members and staff alike. In July 1995, the chairperson of each agencys board of directors received a letter from their primary funder, the Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS), notifying them that as a result of recent community planning, it was MCSSs intent to be working with one administrative structure for the services provided by their agencies before the end of the next fiscal year, March 31, 1996. Hall recalled the frustration felt by her board members at the ambiguity of the direction and MCSSs unwillingness to provide any further direction other than its intent to reduce the budgets of each of the three agencies by 10 to 15 per cent for the next fiscal year. Shortly after receiving the letter, the three agencies, each represented by the executive director, the board chairperson and one other board member, began meeting on a weekly basis to plan. The chairperson of the meeting was rotated weekly from among the executive directors of the three agencies. It quickly became clear that each board had a different interpretation of the funders direction. One agency believed that MCSS was looking for a more collaborative effort but separate agencies. Another agency believed that MCSS was looking for a new administrative agency overseeing the existing three agencies. The third agency believed that MCSS was looking for a complete merger of the existing agencies. What became even clearer, however, was the significant amount of difference in the three organizations cultures and philosophies. Belton House, Hardy Geddes House and Mission Services of Londons Teen Girls Home program were all established in the early 1970s, with their main purpose to provide residential services to adolescents in the community. Each agency was managed by an executive director who reported to a volunteer board of directors. Belton House provided services to young women aged 12 through 18. Its programs were strictly voluntary, and the agency was highly regarded in the community for its innovativeness and willingness to work with other community service providers. Hardy Geddes House provided services to young men aged 12 through 18. Its programs were also strictly voluntary but were often seen in the community as rather selective. Mission Services of London was a large social service agency in London with a Christian focus that pervaded its mission statement, philosophies and operations. Teen Girls Home was only one of Mission Services many, varied programs. Teen Girls Home provided services to young women as well but focused primarily on a younger age group than did Belton House. Its programs were similar to Belton House but were carried out with a Christian influence. Other programs run by Mission Services included shelters for homeless men and women, addiction support programs and a second-hand clothing store. The months of July and August 1995 were marked with little progress and significant tension for the committee. Heated debates took place in the group over the necessity of and funding for a facilitator. One group announced its wish to take over the other two agencies. The individual boards refused to fund any expenditures relating to the efforts of the committee. Finally, a facilitator was agreed upon, and Dr. William Avison, a well-known and highly respected expert in childrens services, was hired with Cdn$10,000 in funding provided by MCSS. Dr. Avisons strategy was to focus the group on the selection of an administrative structure, and he suggested five possibilities, including: maintaining the status quo; absorption by a fourth, outside agency; merging two of the agencies into the third; amalgamating the three agencies to form a new agency; and forming a consortium for administrative purposes only, while maintaining separate programs and boards. The committee members quickly eliminated the first two possibilities as unacceptable to their funder and to the group, respectively. Left with three options, each agency selected a different one as most acceptable. Once again, heated debate, negotiations and side deals took place as Dr. Avison attempted to move the group towards a common choice. Eventually, two of the agencies teamed up and supported the consortium model. The third agency, which was in favor of the amalgamation model, was thereby out-voted and in October 1995, the agencies reluctantly presented a signed letter of agreement to MCSS indicating their willingness to move towards a consortium arrangement for administrative services. Two months later MCSS formally responded to the agencies and indicated that the consortium model was not acceptable and that the three agencies were to be fully amalgamated by the summer of 1996. If the boards did not choose to amalgamate, the services provided by the agencies would be tendered out to other community agencies. The boards were given two weeks to consider MCSSs directive, and on December 31, 1995, each board responded in the affirmative and agreed to proceed with an amalgamation.

Once again a committee was struck, the amalgamation steering committee. Two board representatives from each agency were selected, as well as two independent community representatives. MCSS assigned one of its program supervisors to the committee as well as provided funding for a facilitator. This time, executive directors were not included on the committee, as the first tasks handled by the committee involved the selection of an executive director for the amalgamated agency and the consideration of potential severance liabilities for the unsuccessful candidates. After much heated deliberation and community input, Hall, the executive director of Belton House, was chosen to manage the new agency. A new agency name was selected following an employee contest. New corporate bylaws were agreed to, stipulating that the new board would consist of two members from each of the existing agencies and six members chosen from the community. By June 1996, the Public Trustee of Ontario had issued its consent to the amalgamation, and on July 16, 1996, the first board meeting of Western Area Youth Services.