Evaluation of the Bringing them home and Indigenous mental health programs
11.3.6 Encouraging evaluation and good practice activities
Table of contents
- Acknowledgements
- Study Team
- Glossary
- Executive Summary
1. Introduction- 2. Methodology
- 3 Overview of the four programs
- 4 Literature review
- 5 Key outcomes and achievements of the programs
- 6 Key limitations of the programs
- 7 Management and administrative issues
- 8. Workforce issues
- 9. Issues related to the four programs
- 10. Likely future demand
11. Conclusions and suggested future directions- 11.1 Key findings of the evaluation against the Terms of Reference
- 11.2 Good practice principles
- 11.3 Recommendations for suggested future directions
- 11.3.1 Ensuring Link-Up and BTH services have a stronger focus on first generation Stolen Generations members
- 11.3.2 Actions to address workforce issues
- 11.3.3 Develop national guidelines for all four programs
- 11.3.4 Extending the geographical reach of the programs
- 11.3.5 Improving the operation of SEWB RCs
- 11.3.6 Encouraging evaluation and good practice activities
- 11.3.7 Provide additional funding for complementary programs
- 11.3.8 Enhancing coordination between Link-Up and BTH services
- 11.3.9 Improve processes for accessing records
- 11.3.10 Research
- Appendix A: Stakeholders consulted
- Appendix B: Literature review
- References
Developing an Evaluation Framework and supporting manual
There has to date been uneven attention given to evaluation and action research by the services, with some conducting rigorous evaluation activities but most not. It is also likely that there is limited relevant experience and expertise concerning evaluation amongst the service providers.Various strategies could be adopted to encourage a greater focus on evaluation and research. These include:
- Developing a detailed Evaluation Framework for each of the four programs, in order to encourage a greater focus on evaluation. This could include specifying suitable Performance Indicators, and the type of data that could be collected to demonstrate progress. The Framework would need to be developed by people with expertise in evaluation and research, and in consultation with OATSIH and the services. It should dovetail well with services’ existing data collection systems, and collect information that is useful for the services themselves in informing their service delivery. The contract with the service providers could require that all services collect and report on data according to this Framework. The Framework would need to be positioned relative to the SDRF reporting framework.
- Developing a supporting manual for the Framework, which provides information in a user-friendly format about key principles of evaluation/action research, further guidance and practical examples of how to collect data, and ideas about who will conduct this activity. The manual developed by the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs for service providers under the Reconnect program provides an example.
- Holding national or State-level training workshops on how to implement and use the Evaluation Framework and supporting Manual, as occurs with the Reconnect program.
- Providing a separate line item of funding for evaluation activities for Link-Up and BTH services (preferably by an external evaluator), and requiring annual reporting on how this money is spent.
Regular good practice forums
Currently OATSIH convenes national Link-Up and SEWB RC Forums on an annual basis.OATSIH could convene regular national/State-level forums for service providers to share, develop and document good practice (as already occurs in Victoria). The proceedings from these forums should be published and disseminated to all services, and provided on the new website which could be established (see below). The cost of attendance at these should be integrated into core funding for the services.
Given that Aboriginal SEWB is a relatively undeveloped field, the sharing and development of good practice should include examining whether there are good practice service delivery approaches in other fields that can inform development of good practice in this areas.
For example, the Aboriginal Family Decision-Making Program run by the Department of Human Services in Victoria is run in partnership with the Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency. The program encourages families who have had their children removed through current child welfare processes to maintain family contact and access support services. Although this program has not been evaluated, there is anecdotal feedback that it is working well at engaging with families. Lessons could potentially be learnt here about how to access an Aboriginal client group which is traditionally reluctant to access services (ie families from whom children have currently been removed, vis a vis first generation members).
Establishing a website for the programs
OATSIH could establish a website to provide various sources of information such as:- the national guidelines for the four programs
- resources on good practice in Aboriginal SEWB, particularly where these deal with the Stolen Generations target group in particular, including proceedings from good practice forums (see above)
- information on potential sources of funds to conduct activities which complement the activities of the four programs