Evaluation of the NT MOS projects
An evolving service model
Up to Closing the Gap: Northern Territory
A consistent theme in the research literature is that there is a lack of appropriate abuse counselling services for Aboriginal children and culturally appropriate support services for families, and that this is particularly true in remote areas. (Refer to Appendix D: Literature review.) There is little specific research literature on what are effective and culturally safe programs which attempt to prevent or address child abuse or neglect6, so there is little documented evidence-based practice from which to learn and develop effective practice.
"...There have been a number of attempts to replicate other models of service delivery, and I think we're saying that's not sustainable, we need to do it differently. This area of clinical work is changing and developing because it's so new..." (MOS Expert Reference Group member)
The literature further notes that there is little documented information about health and wellbeing services run by Aboriginal organisations in Aboriginal communities which means there is limited opportunity to learn from programs which are regarded as successful and worthwhile by Aboriginal communities.7
Research literature is clear that effective and ongoing consultation and engagement with Aboriginal communities is essential for the effectiveness of the program. It is equally clear that this process takes time and patience.
During this evaluation, local and outreach service providers stressed that working in Indigenous communities, and building a relationship, does take time. Others spoke of the sensitivities around building trust in remote communities, which requires time, service consistency and culturally safe practice - particularly in the sensitive service area of child sexual assault.
Literature reviewed agreed that a three to four year funding cycle is not sufficient to provide the services required. Long term funding commitments are required so program funding is not tied to short term outcomes which are often unrealistic given the nature of the program.8
"...Most certainly it (MOS) is needed, but it's very early days. I don't think I could possibly say whether it's working..." (MOS Expert Reference Group member)
Literature further suggests the consistency and sustainability of services are more important for Aboriginal service users than for non-Aboriginal users, because "we have had a 20-year history of six-month programs": (BIPACSA, 2007, p55). Some literature suggest that short term interventions with no sustained follow up could be more detrimental to children and communities than no intervention at all.9
Finding
This is an evolving service model which requires time to engage respectfully with the community and with the sector, and to adapt and be responsive to community and service need.Footnotes
6 Stanley et al, 2003: O'Brien, 2010: Appendix D: Literature Review
7 Cripps (in Purdie et al (eds) 2010); Carson et al 2007: Appendix D: Literature Review
8 Santhanam, 2005: BIPACSA, 2007: Appendix D: Literature Review
9 Flaxman et al, 2009; O'Brien, 2010: Appendix D: Literature Review