Notwithstanding the obligations placed on Local Boards, derived from both the Local Government Act and the Treaty of Waitangi for improving Maori Input into Local Government Decision making, the working group recognised there was a real need for them to understand the value of engaging, whether compelled or otherwise, and for what real purpose in the end. And so with a Results Based Accountability (RBA) approach, the group as individual entities explored first the purpose of their existence, and what importance this held for each of them.
Through this process they found they shared a common purpose that was simply about ensuring a physical, economic and cultural environment exists. One sufficient to allow all people in Otara-Papatoetoe, Mangere-Otahuhu and Manurewa the same opportunity of being healthy, well, thriving and fulfilled spiritually, mentally, culturally and physically’.
It became clear if not acknowledged already, that whether required by the Act or Tikanga Maori, both Local Boards and Mana Whenua enjoy a shared role of responsibility. And from the very nature of their existence, each possesses a genuine desire and motivation to see their common purpose, realised.
And so by the third hui, applying the RBA approach; the group agreed a common population level outcome meaningful to them both.
In order to ensure a clear understanding of the population outcome sought after by the group, the membership provided a list of what this looks like for them if happening today. The list is provided further below.
Continuing with the RBA approach, together the group translated these conditions into seven population level indicators. They followed this up with an exercise to determine just how well the population group was actually doing on these. Without actual data at hand, they applied a group think approach drawing on their professional, personal and lived experience to do this. The population indicators listed below, and presented within the next section in graphic form, contain a base line with a short narrative of the story behind each. In some cases the group think data may be replaced with that from other sources.
 Group think is the term used throughout this scorecard to describe that the data, views, information provided is the working groups professional, personal or lived experience, and may or may not align or agree with data captured or recorded from other sources.