4. PLENARY - DAY 1
4.1 Welcome to Country
The traditional owners and elders of the land on which the conference was held were acknowledged. At the opening plenary on the first day, One Fire Dance Group Aboriginal performer John Tye celebrated Indigenous culture with dance, music and song.
4.2 Setting the Scene and Plan for the Future
A panel of Australian Government departmental officers with responsibility for the funding and administration of the FRSP addressed conference themes and engaged in a panel discussion on policy, progress and future directions of FRSP.
David Hazlehurst, Families Group Manager, FaHCSIA, spoke about the primary challenges of day-to-day service delivery, with particular need for government to better support joined up FRSP service delivery rather than funding a series of separate, stand alone services.
David discussed the growing need within Australian Government to improve integration across its agencies. Recent integrated initiatives, such as the Family Relationship Centres, Family Relationship Advice Line (FRAL) and the Family Relationships Online (FRO) support this new operating environment.
David identified future challenges for the sector, such as a need for more information sharing to support sector growth, particularly in the areas of Indigenous need, complex cases and non-mainstream groups. The Australian Family Relationships Clearinghouse website initiative supports this need.
Robyn Fleming, Branch Manager, Family Relationship Services Branch, FaHCSIA, commended the FRSP non-government services sector on its capacity to maintain quality services throughout a period of rapid expansion and at the same time, participate in the development of products to support a new infrastructure, particularly those relating to Indigenous communities and Father Inclusive Practice.
[
top ]
Major achievements included:
- the continuing development of FRSP Online. An ongoing challenge for FaHCSIA is communicating the benefits of FRSP Online development to FRSP service providers and its capacity to provide real time service data useful to both government and non-government sectors
- the integration of services across the sector. For example, the networking between Family Relationship Centres, Early Intervention Services and other Australian Government departments that fund human services to provide an integrated response to those people affected by drought, mental health, etc
- the sector networking with other programs across government to integrate a broad range of services to clients with complex needs.
A specific challenge identified was creating stronger links with other Australian Government services and State and Territory Government funded programs and services. Where effective links of this nature were in place, FRSP had been able to develop a suite of programs to meet the needs of disadvantaged families in a holistic way, moving the family through a series of supports to break the cycle of disadvantage (eg unemployment, financial stresses, homelessness, etc). The development of a suite of home based resources was also achieved through effective links, such as the Keys to Living Together DVDs and booklets.
Other areas identified for further development included Indigenous program strategies, products and tools, developing guidelines and principles with the FRSP non-government sector for Father Inclusive Practice, improving communication between all agencies, and developing a robust strategic plan to see the FRSP through the next phase.
Sue Pidgeon, Assistant Secretary, Family Pathways Branch, AGD, acknowledged the significant effort all stakeholders had made to improve levels of cooperation and collaboration across the FRSP.
Within three years, FRSP has tripled in size and funding, and new service models have evolved quickly. Instead of competitive rivalry, service providers have worked in collaboration to meet growth and service delivery demands.
This has been particularly evident in the development of consortia across the country to deliver new and expanded services. The increase in the number of consortia since 2005 has been an unexpected but welcome development, as it means much greater ability to share innovations and integrate service delivery.
Other challenges identified and linked to growth included the need to attract, retain and support suitably qualified staff. The rapid expansion of the service system has made this a critical issue.
Matt Miller, General Manager, Child Support Agency, CSA, spoke about a growing need to integrate services for separating and separated families across government and non-government.
The CSA comes from a customer service delivery perspective and has done much work to build on AGD’s recent innovations, such as the Family Relationship Centres.
CSA wants to work holistically to improve collaboration across the Australian Government so the sector sees a more ‘joined up’ government approach. However, there is a need for greater understanding of CSA’s role to achieve this integration.
The traditional role of government service delivery is changing. Feedback from CSA customers identified a need for less paternalism and additional help for separated families to become more child focussed. This theme mirrors the new family law system reforms. CSA’s July 2008 milestone to roll out the new child support system creates service integration opportunities.
CSA recognises not only the financial implications for separating and separated families, but also the emotional issues involved and the need to treat its customer base as a ‘whole’ rather than as individual cases/transactions. CSA is now looking to work holistically and improve collaboration to ensure that those parents with complex needs receive the referrals and assistance they need.
The efficacy of self-help education tools and support services in helping families with relationship difficulties was seen as an area where significantly better outcomes could be achieved through more collaborative effort, both within government and with the non-government sector.
Challenges for the future are how to work collaboratively and share information across the Australian Government to encourage innovation in service delivery and to strive for continuous improvements.
[
top ]
4.3 Attorney General’s address
The then Attorney General the Hon Philip Ruddock opened his presentation by acknowledging FRSP as changing significantly since it was first introduced in the early 1960s, in response to changing needs in the community. He discussed a number of key topics.
Family law reforms - FRSP is central to the family law reforms and these aim to create a new culture where the interests of children come first and parents can access support to care for their children and their relationships. Mr Ruddock acknowledged the services provided by the sector as vital to this cultural shift and expressed his appreciation of the sector’s efforts to improve outcomes for Australian families.
Integrated services – Mr Ruddock emphasised the reforms were in fact an integrated package aimed at promoting healthy family relationships, preventing conflict and separation, encouraging agreement rather than litigation and promoting the rights of children to know both their parents. He reiterated integration was best achieved by working together to develop cross-sector links that open access to all family relationship services. The Family Relationship Centres assist in this referral process.
Compulsory family dispute resolution - from 1 July 2007, separated parents wishing to take their disputes to court must first try to resolve issues outside of court with the help of a family dispute practitioner (excluding family violence and child abuse cases). This represented another step in the shift away from separation being seen as a legal and emotional battle between parents, towards a culture of cooperation.
Family Pathways Networks - in response to a need for a more integrated family law system, AGD had been providing funding of up to $30,000 to Family Pathways Networks to improve coordination across the system. Ten Pathways Networks are operating in various parts of Australia. These networks had been integral to developing links between service providers in the family law system (both government and non-government), to promote information sharing and discussion. Mr Ruddock encouraged practitioners working with separating or separated families to become involved in the network, if they had not already done so.
Innovative services - one of the strengths of the FRSP is its capacity to develop and deliver innovative services. Mr Ruddock acknowledged the importance of the sector remaining flexible, responsive to change and open to new practices. Two new programs to be rolled out across regional Australia are the results of such innovation.
The first is a counselling service for children of separated parents that will let them participate in decisions which impact on them. The second is an educational support program, Post Separation Cooperative Parenting, designed to help separated parents understand the impact their conflicts have on their children.
Evaluation of the new system - the Australian Institute of Family Studies has been consulted by AGD to evaluate both the changes to the law and the effectiveness of the new and expanded services funded under FRSP, to measure policy outcomes. Mr Ruddock encouraged the sector to participate in this evaluation.
4.4 Keynote speakers 1 and 2
Dr Norman Swan and Dr Rhonda Galbally AO addressed the following:
- the need to celebrate successes
- Australian leaders are rigorous innovators
- pilot project difficulties
- integration should have simple rules and allow for gaps/errors
- how the past can inform the future.
[
top ]
Dr Norman Swan is best known for his wide broadcasting experience, including the award-winning Health Report for ABC Radio National. He talked about celebration, innovation and integration.
Celebration - Dr Swan discussed Australian’s perception of the word ‘success’ and how Australians have a unique sense of success compared to the United States. In the US, success means achieving a target. Failure along the way is allowed as long as the target is achieved and if this happens, Americans often consider themselves ‘heroes’. In Australia, failure on the road to success is less accepted, it is important not to fail along the way. Good leaders make sure the road to success is clearly laid out and make clear the tolerance for failure along the way. Australians tend to be sceptical of celebration and embarrassed about being praised for small achievements. Dr Swan emphasised the need to celebrate, but only when it is appropriate and real measurable outcomes are achieved.
Innovation - Dr Swan compared the Australian style of leadership to that of the US. Australians use a maternal/paternal approach to leadership, as opposed to American leaders who set directions and then step back. Despite many complaints about the inefficiencies inherent in our federation, it may be that Australian public sector innovation is more sustainable because it’s harder to achieve and requires deeper levels of consultation and buy in.
The difficulties with pilot projects in Australia were highlighted. Pilot projects are often created without commitment to their continuation. Dr Swan considered it more appropriate to call them experiments. Dr Swan argued that we are a nation of pilot projects with insufficient translation of success into systemic action.
Safety and Quality - Dr Swan described the work of Professor James Reason and his description of safe systems as being like a Swiss cheese, with “many holes that don’t go all the way through”. That is, the design of safe systems should assume that errors will occur but make it hard for those errors to navigate their way through the cheese to cause a disaster. Safety and quality cannot be achieved unless there is a fundamental understanding about how a system is designed. An integrated system requires a simple set of rules. Even complex systems can be based on a simple set of rules. Generally, these rules should not make organisations feel good, but rather should make them feel uncomfortable because they set boundaries, rules and goals.
In terms of measuring the success of integrated systems, the principal focus is the journey itself. Central, national level setting is very important and so too is the awareness that there can be some inequities between areas. The big challenge is to define roles clearly.
Dr Rhonda Galbally AO is founding CEO of www.ourcommunity.com.au, former founding CEO of the Victoria Health promotion Foundation, The Australian Commission for the Future, the Myer Foundation and the Sidney Myer Fund.
In her keynote speech, Dr Galbally reflected on the significant changes and transitions in family relationships over the last 50 years. She spoke of contraception and choice, including infertility and abortion, the growing acceptance of diverse families, including single parents and gay parents, and birth itself - technology, maternal control, mental and physical health and wellbeing, readiness to go home. She covered gender role changes, including roles in families and maternity and paternity leave, community support – formal and informal and the growing importance of playgroups and parenting support. Dr Galbally also talked about early learning and pressure cooker children, children with disabilities and the impact on families and child rearing practices, including corporal punishment. Domestic violence – public recognition, sanctions and prevention, mental health issues and acknowledged impact on families was also covered.
Clearly 50 years have seen a transformation in the very nature of families. Today there is greater acceptance of the vast diversity in types of families, however, many diverse families are still treated with ambivalence by the state (eg, same sex families). While the contraceptive revolution provides more choice on whether or not to have a baby, still abortion remains under the criminal code in most states. While we acknowledge the need to support families of a child with disability to keep their child at home rather than in an institution, there is inadequate support for these families. While there is some community infrastructure for parental support, such as playgroups, this infrastructure is not universally available and is weaker in disadvantaged areas (fewer playgroups and not on Saturday to accommodate working parents etc). While childcare is part of community infrastructure, there is insufficient supply and long waiting lists. While both women and men now work, there is a dearth of genuine commitment to family friendly work places.
Having children in 2007 is, in common with the whole society, a more highly individualistic act. As the future generation of Australia, children are not presently seen as a community responsibility. Rather they are considered to be the responsibility of individual families, including when things go wrong. This is symbolised by the constant stream of public disclaimers in the media by single people angrily rejecting any responsibility via the taxation system for families with children.
Envisioning a family friendly Australian society 50 years hence would generate the necessary debate about the very importance, the centrality, of families for Australia’s future.
One scenario (the one I would favour) includes ensuring that family life is not a lonely, impoverishing experience – that families do not live in isolation having to resolve problems on their own. Key aspects of my preferred scenario would include only the birth of wanted babies, with IVF available to all family types. Family support would be universal - seamless and immediate when there are special needs. Family violence, including smacking children, would be rare because of a highly developed ethos of community responsibility, targeted sanctions and network of accessible and inclusive support systems.
The take home message is that when developing policy or implementing programs we need to reflect on history and the key transitions to the present in our analysis of what works for families, what doesn’t and why. The next step is to look at what we want for the future of families and allow for robust debate about a numbers of alternative scenarios, including a thorough analysis of the consequences of different scenarios. Then we can plan and develop the timeframe, the programs, the systems and the budget needed to achieve the desired future for Australia’s family relationships.
5. PLENARY - DAY 2
5.1 Entertainment
Paul Huggart is a talented Gordan Care Centre social worker from Melbourne. He opened the plenary session with a song about a single divorced father who sees ‘every Saturday as father’s day’. The song acknowledged the role of separated men and fathers.
Paul also performed the song Trust Your Cape, which resonated with delegates who had taken a leap of faith into new and expanded services.
[
top ]
5.2 Keynote speaker 3
Penny Ryan of RPR Consulting provided participants with a progress report of a revised FRSP Performance Framework. The current FRSP Performance Framework (available online at www.fahcsia.gov.au) expires on 30 June 2008 and is currently under review. For Early Intervention Services, FaHCSIA is aiming to replace the current framework with an updated version prior to 30 June 2008.
The revised FRSP Performance Framework aims to provide an integrated reporting system that allows government to monitor both effort and effect in delivering services. It was developed in consultation with the sector, the Attorney-General’s Department and other stakeholders.
The reporting system should allow FaHCSIA to report at both a program level and at an individual service level, to enable both government and non-government to improve service outcomes and quality, noting the importance of striking the right balance between information collected versus the burden of reporting.
Achievements so far include the development of:
- a working party to refine the Program Logic (held in March 2006)
- a national FRSP meeting of service providers (held in May 2006)
- several data modelling workshops (held in June to September 2006), with over 200 practitioners from all service types participating
- new data collection, reporting tools and supporting documents.
The next steps for the FRSP Performance Framework are to:
- ensure the revised framework is available to all stakeholders at the termination of the current framework
- consider the timing and extent of piloting the proposed new data collection and reporting tools.
A current reporting weakness includes the inability to identify the focus of an individual FRSP intervention - prevention, early intervention, dealing with entrenched issues and post separation work to make informed policy decisions. There is also no capacity to measure complex cases, which has a significant effect on outcomes for clients. In the proposed system, a simple case complexity tool could be implemented to measure relative complexity across FRSP services. In the revised framework, practitioners could also indicate case complexity.
In addition to these tools, the following reporting tools may be included in the revised FRSP Performance Framework.
- A revised Annual Status Report - one report per organisation covering all service outlets. Organisations would be asked to include short anonymous case studies in a similar format, to allow a qualitative method of highlighting significant outcomes for individuals, families and communities. The Annual Status Report would include a Statement of Ongoing Compliance with the Approval Requirements. All organisations would need to have compliance signed-off with Approval Requirements each year and both the Chair and CEO would be required to sign the checklist statement.
- Simplified client feedback focusing on measuring client satisfaction (in both individual and group settings).
- A stakeholder feedback survey that would seek feedback from other organisations - around 20 stakeholders would be asked to complete the simple survey via a meeting or mail.
New standardised reports would allow service providers to get detailed data about their own organisation to help in performance monitoring and improvement. Information collected would enable the production of standardised 'dashboard' reports summarising key performance. With this information, FRSP would be better informed to make policy and program decisions. It would also enable FRSP to profile each organisation for performance effectiveness (eg, market trends, geographic service needs, intervention focus, etc).
5.4 What happened next
After the presentation by Penny Ryan, participants were invited to contribute to an interactive discussion about the future of the FRSP Performance Framework, with a panel comprising Robyn Fleming (FaHCSIA), Sue Pidgeon (AGD) and Penny Ryan (RPR Consulting).
Participants asked a number of clarifying questions about reporting and program logic (refer to
Attachment A). Sue Pidgeon clarified that the current work to develop a revised framework was focusing on Early Intervention Services. There are no plans at this stage to adopt it for Post Separation Services. Family Relationship Centres and the Family Relationship Advice Line have outcome based performance frameworks already in place.