• Previous
• Next

Annual Report 2009–20010 » Part 5: Appendix L

Appendix L
CGRIS Annual Report 2009–10

The Hon. Jenny Macklin, MP
Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister

As required under section 28(1) of the Coordinator-General for Remote Indigenous Services Act 2009, I am pleased to present to you my report for the period 20 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 as part of the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs Annual Report.

In presenting you with the report on the activities of the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services, I take this opportunity to express my thanks to the staff of the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs for their assistance.

Brian Gleeson
Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services

Back to top

---

Purpose and nature of role

The Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services is a statutory officer established under the Coordinator-General for Remote Indigenous Services Act 2009 (CGRIS Act).

The Office of the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services (OCGRIS) was created to support the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services, including to:

• oversee the implementation of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery in remote Indigenous communities
• formally report to the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs twice a year on progress, and ensure that all government service agencies are held accountable for their implementation responsibilities under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery
• work across agencies to cut through bureaucratic blockages and red tape, and to make sure services are delivered effectively
• have a direct line of sight to the whole-of-government regional operations centres established to coordinate services in communities and the single government contact points located within the 29 remote Indigenous communities identified as priority communities.

OCGRIS seeks to balance its overseeing and reporting functions against its function of driving the remote service delivery agenda by engaging with departments and other stakeholders.

In particular, the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services is responsible for:

• monitoring, assessing and advising on progress with the implementation of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery and in Closing the Gap in the 29 priority communities
• influencing policies and programs to ensure that they prioritise the 29 communities and are delivered in a way that improves the overall functioning and cohesiveness of those communities
• working cooperatively with stakeholders, recognising that we do not have direct responsibility for delivering programs.

Back to top

Focus in 2009–10

The 2009–10 financial year was a critical time in the five-year life of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery, with the establishment of the single government interface, development of Local Implementation Plans, completion of baseline mapping and the transition of mainstream agencies to the new way of working.

The Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services, Brian Gleeson, commenced on 20 July 2009 (see our website for a profile of the Coordinator General). The office underwent a steep learning curve in establishing and embedding the new role and function of the Coordinator General. In future years, we will work towards consolidating the role of OCGRIS.

One of the first tasks was to establish a website. This was steadily improved during the year and now includes searchable information on the 29 priority communities. This is a key element of our reporting, transparency and accountability mechanisms and is a unique information source for public use.

OCGRIS worked quickly to build understanding of the Coordinator General’s role in the remote service delivery communities, including developing strong relationships with community reference groups. The Coordinator General visited all 29 communities in the first four months, and the Coordinator General and officers made a total of 63 visits to communities. Issues identified in those visits are identified and reported on in the Coordinator General’s six-monthly report to the minister.

The first report to the minister was an important initial focus for the office. The report made a number of recommendations to COAG. All recommendations were either agreed to or agreed to in principle.

Our strategic plan was developed in late 2009, and strategic priorities were identified and communicated widely in early 2010. The plan will be revisited in late 2010 to ensure that we are appropriately responding to the strategic issues relating to our role.

All staff took part in customised cultural competency training early in 2010 and have taken part in two formal planning sessions.

A number of policy projects were undertaken in the areas of governance and leadership, community safety, health service models, youth and gender.

A significant focus in 2010 has been the development of Local Implementation Plans. This activity will be reported on in detail in the Coordinator General’s second report to the minister. Senior officers attended Local Implementation Planning activities at a cross-section of communities and at the jurisdictional level as observers.

OCGRIS has developed strong relationships with stakeholders. We have formalised relationships with the Coordinators General in the states and the Northern Territory by establishing the Coordinators General network. The network has met four times and will be extended to include Australian Government national coordinators in 2010–11.

To obtain some independent feedback on our performance, we conducted an online survey in early June 2010. We surveyed 198 stakeholders and had a response rate of 24 per cent. The results are included throughout the remainder of the report.

Back to top

Outcomes

OCGRIS’s main mechanism for reporting on outcomes is the six-monthly report to the minister. The highlights in 2009–10 included:

• increasing the focus on community governance and capacity building
• presenting seven policy papers to jurisdictional boards of management
• facilitating the education continuum approach at Hermannsburg, which now forms the basis for future work in this area
• seeking and obtaining additional support to accelerate the rollout of trades training facilities in priority communities
• assisting in the resolution of 13 significant program delivery issues and a number of smaller blockages
• receiving encouraging results from our online survey: 59 per cent of stakeholders thought that OCGRIS provided effective oversight of the remote service delivery approach, and 82 per cent thought that the advice provided by OCGRIS officers was useful.

Outlook

In 2010–11, the focus of OCGRIS will shift to monitoring the rollout of the Local Implementation Plans and ensuring that they are focused on improving the overall functioning and cohesiveness of the specified communities.

To this end, we will continue to provide policy advice on what works, with an initial focus on improved governance and capacity building (including the skills of government officers working in remote contexts), school attendance and health promotion. We will also examine options for the reform of funding arrangements for the 29 priority communities.

We will also work with FaHCSIA to ensure that robust arrangements are in place for monitoring progress against Local Implementation Plans in the priority communities.

Furthermore, OCGRIS will participate in the development of the evaluation framework for the remote service delivery partnership and continue to push for reform in capital works program management, building public sector capacity for working in partnership with communities and other agencies.

Back to top

Role, function and structure

The CGRIS is an independent statutory officer physically located within FaHCSIA and corporately supported by the Department.

Function

The functions of the CGRIS are set out in section 8 of the CGRIS Act. These are to:

… monitor, assess, advise in relation to, and drive:

1. The development and delivery of government services and facilities in each of the specified remote communities to a standard broadly comparable with that in non-Indigenous communities of similar size, location and needs elsewhere in Australia, including through:
   1. improvements to the coordination of the development and delivery of such services and facilities; and
   2. reforms to the development and delivery of such services and facilities; and
2. progress towards achieving the Closing the Gap targets in the specified remote communities.

Under the CGRIS Act, the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services is required to:

• produce a report to the minister twice yearly on these issues (s. 15)
• produce an annual report as soon as practicable after 30 June each year on the operations of the Coordinator General and the Coordinator General’s staff during the year (s. 28)
• report to the minister on failures to comply with requests made under sections 9 and 9A of the CGRIS Act (s. 16)
• monitor the implementation of Local Implementation Plans (s. 14).

The reports and further information about the role and function of the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services are available on our website.

Back to top

Organisational structure

The staff who support the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services in the performance of these functions are employed by FaHCSIA. All staff are formally located in Canberra, with one officer outposted in Brisbane.

We focus our efforts at the local/regional, state/Northern Territory and national levels. OCGRIS includes senior staff who are responsible for each of the five remote service delivery jurisdictions and key portfolio areas, with a small team providing administrative and research support (see Figure L-1).

We are also active participants in FaHCSIA’s graduate trainee program and have had a number of officers on short-term placements and seconded from other agencies to assist in implementing our project approach.

Figure L-1 Organisation chart on 30 June 2010

Description of Figure L-1

Back to top

Management and accountability

Corporate governance

The Secretary of FaHCSIA is responsible for our corporate governance.

The Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services (or delegate) is a member of the Department’s Senior Management Group and the committees and boards noted in Table L-1.

Table L-1Membership of committees and boards

Committee/board	Meets
Australian Government
Secretaries Group on Indigenous Affairs	Every two months
Executive Coordination Forum on Indigenous Affairs	Six-weekly
Closing the Gap Committee (FaHCSIA)	Monthly
Remote service delivery cross-agency meeting	Monthly
National Indigenous Violence and Child Abuse Intelligence Task Force	Monthly
Intergovernmental
Boards of management / state operations committees / state management committees in each jurisdiction	Monthly
Coordinators General network (Secretariat)	Every two months
Other
Cape York Welfare Reform Board (observer—from May)	Monthly

The Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services assisted the Secretary at Senate Estimates hearings in February and June.

FaHCSIA assists the Coordinator General with the provision of the full range of corporate support functions, including asset management, purchasing, consultants, IT, communications, human resources, information (library) services and records management.

Back to top

Review of performance

OCGRIS’s strategic objectives are set out in Figure L-2. A detailed report on our performance against each objective follows.

Figure L-2Objectives

Description of Figure L-2

Performance in achieving objectives, 2009–10

Objective 1. Effective assessment and reporting of progress

Section 15 of the Coordinator‑General for Remote Indigenous Services Act 2009 sets out our responsibilities with respect to reporting:

• The Coordinator General must prepare and give to the Minister twice each year, or as otherwise required by the Minister, a report on:
• a.  the development and delivery, during the period since the Coordinator General last gave a report to the Minister under this section, of government services and facilities in each of the specified remote communities… including through:
•  i.   improvements to the coordination of the development and delivery of such services and facilities; and
• ii.   reforms to the development and delivery of such services and facilities; and
• b.  the progress that has been made during that period towards achieving the Closing the Gap targets in the specified remote communities.

The first six‑monthly report was released on 4 December 2009. It included community‑specific information, information on Closing the Gap investment in each community and an initial assessment of the 'governance and capacity gap'. The report made a number of recommendations, which were referred to the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Working Group on Indigenous Reform for consideration (see also Objective 3.1).

The timing of the six‑monthly reports has been reviewed to ensure alignment with other Closing the Gap reporting for the COAG meeting cycles of August to October and March to May.

Back to top

 

Figure L-3Stakeholder views on first six-monthly report

Description of Figure L-3

 

The balance between community and government would seem to have been about right, with opinion equally divided on whether there should be more emphasis on government, on communities, or on neither (the balance was right).

Back to top

Objective 2. Effective monitoring of Local Implementation Plans

The key mechanism for ongoing activity in each of the 29 priority communities is the Local Implementation Plan. Local Implementation Plans set out service delivery priorities which were agreed between community groups and governments, and non-governmental and private sector organisations where relevant, consistent with the COAG targets. The plans include targets, actions and associated milestones and timelines and are publicly reported against annually.

OCGRIS's responsibilities for Local Implementation Planning are set out in section 14 of the CGRIS Act:

• (1) The Coordinator General may comment on draft Local Implementation Plans.
• (2) The Coordinator General must monitor the implementation of each Local Implementation Plan.

The first Local Implementation Plans for all 29 priority communities were to be signed off by 30 June 2010. OCGRIS pushed strongly for this deadline to be met, expecting governments to manage the process well enough to enable communities to commit to a Local Implementation Plan within the timeline. Nonetheless, it was understood that for reasons beyond governments' control, some communities may have been reluctant or not in a position to sign off on a Local Implementation Plan by the deadline. In the case of reluctance, OCGRIS had a clear expectation that a Local Implementation Plan detailing areas of agreement, non-agreement and processes to resolve outstanding issues would be signed off.

OCGRIS provided early advice to ensure that parties were clear about elements of its assessment of the process and content of the plans. OCGRIS provided papers on the process and content of plans to the boards of management (state operations committees / state management committees) in all jurisdictions. We also gave advice on incorporating community safety and health considerations within Local Implementation Plans, local government involvement and governance and leadership issues.

Back to top

Objective 3. Policies and programs that are delivered in a way that improves the overall functioning and cohesiveness of the specified communities

To be effective, OCGRIS must be capable of working with agencies and stakeholders to drive the implementation of the remote service delivery approach. This requires leadership in articulating the new model of service required by governments and a capacity to influence our partners to shift their focus, resources and effort in line with the COAG-agreed goals.

To do this we need to:

• hold governments accountable for progress towards closing the gap in the 29 priority communities
• assist in defining and developing the strategic issues in the remote service delivery strategy
• collect views and concerns from communities and ensure that governments respond
• take the opportunity to approach situations differently
• work with stakeholders to unblock problems with service delivery and develop proposals for innovative approaches to issues raised by communities.

Objective 3.1 Effective advice to influence policies and programs

The first report to the minister was released on 4 December 2009 and noted by COAG on 7 December 2009. COAG asked the Working Group on Indigenous Reform, a COAG subcommittee, to provide a progress status report on the recommendations, including action taken to address the recommendations and any further action that might be required of COAG. On 19 April 2010, COAG noted the response and:

• agreed to amend the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery to recognise the important role of local government or other municipal service providers in ensuring the effective delivery of the partnership in each priority community, with the detail of these service provider commitments to be captured in a Local Implementation Plan for each priority community
• restated its commitment to closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage and to continue active consideration of the needs of the 29 priority communities under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery when implementing COAG National Partnerships relevant to remote communities.

The report made 17 separate recommendations and raised a number of issues of importance across governments. COAG agreed to 11 recommendations, and agreed in principle to a further five recommendations. One further recommendation had been completed by the time of the COAG meeting.

We have also influenced policy by:

• highlighting the need to change agency systems to track place-based approaches
• highlighting public sector capacity issues in the submission to the Moran review on the issues and reform directions highlighted in Reform of Australian Government administration: building the world's best public service
• providing input to Infrastructure Australia's Indigenous Infrastructure priorities, Centrelink's Indigenous Service Offer and the Indigenous Education Action Plan
• pursuing the development of strong early childhood education and care platforms incorporating co-located and integrated services that serve as lines of identification and defence against child abuse and neglect, and that prepare children and families for school and work to meet the Closing the Gap target in early childhood
• working on the 'education continuum', which has started to lay out some important concepts to be built on and implemented, including facilitating community access to school infrastructure after hours and co-location of education facilities
• advocating for the Central Australian Renal Services Study, which is looking at models of remote dialysis that were previously closed off from consideration.

In addition, following the first report to the minister in December 2009, we decided to commence a number of discrete projects in priority areas common to most of the 29 communities. The projects included:

• a paper on community safety which seeks to detail existing data on violence and safety in the 29 priority communities, document existing good practice in those locations and outline the available evidence of what works. The paper details the elements of a successful approach to community safety with a view to informing Local Implementation Plans in communities.
• a paper on youth servicing which will document the current services available to young people in a selected number of priority communities and which suggests, on the basis of available evidence, a model of coordinated youth services
• a paper on governance and capacity building by a secondee from Reconciliation Australia, supported by an external reference group of experts. The paper, which is nearing completion, examines options for enhancing government capacity in remote service delivery and for strengthening corporate governance in communities.

OCGRIS has also contributed a number of papers to jurisdictional board of management meetings to assist with the development of the new way of working within the remote service delivery approach, including on governance and leadership, Local Implementation Planning, early childhood education and care, schooling and training service models, community safety, local government and health service models.

Back to top

Objective 3.2 Effective facilitation of program delivery

In 2009-10, OCGRIS worked with stakeholders to unblock problems with service delivery across all jurisdictions; some of the results of its efforts are outlined in Table L-2.

Table L-2Results of program delivery facilitation

Jurisdiction	Result
NSW	Funds secured for repairs and maintenance at the Walgett Aboriginal Medical Service.
NT	School facilities being used as community facilities; Lajamanu school computer lab now open for after-hours adult access. Hermannsburg education precinct (see case study) and $2 million allocated for a new child care centre. Nurse-assisted dialysis facility to be provided at Hermannsburg—a considerable shift in policy position by both governments. New clinic agreed for Lajamanu at $6.1 million.
QLD	The issue of all-weather access at Doomadgee progressed, with Airservices Australia agreeing to accelerate the GPS mapping of the airstrip. Additional funding for PCYC Doomadgee secured.
SA	Review of utilisation of substance misuse centre and services in Amata. Early childhood facility in Amata and Indulkina (site agreed, project managers re-engaged, proposed dates for construction and completion agreed).
WA	Burks Park workers’ accommodation, Halls Creek.

Back to top

Objective 4. Sound cooperative working relationships with our stakeholders

Our role is to influence outcomes by providing leadership, support and advice to those engaged directly in implementing the remote service delivery approach. Therefore, the strength of our relationships with others is critical to our effectiveness as an organisation.

During 2009–10, OCGRIS staff sat on a number of boards of management and used the opportunity provided to influence policies and implementation where possible (see Table L-1 on page 412). Within the Australian Government, the major coordination committees (the Secretaries Group on Indigenous Affairs and the Executive Coordination Forum on Indigenous Affairs) have standing items for remote service delivery and the Coordinator General for Remote Indigenous Services.

In addition, OCGRIS recognised that there was a need for the Coordinators General to exchange views and information on a regular basis and established the Coordinators General network. This was formalised early in 2010 and now meets every two months. Future meetings will include a session with national coordinators, particularly those from FaHCSIA, the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations and the Department of Health and Ageing, to ensure that strategic issues are progressed.

For policy projects such as that relating to governance and leadership, we established an expert reference group, including a broad range of stakeholders, to ensure that the research remained on track and relevant.

Regular visits to communities have been essential to meet with key people and gain an on-the-ground understanding of key challenges. The visits have also been important in enabling the OCGRIS to observe firsthand the Local Implementation Planning process. The communities visited are detailed in Table L-3.

Back to top

Table L-3Stakeholder engagement—community visits, 2009–10

Community visit	2009	2010
New South Wales
Walgett	August	February, April, June
Wilcannia	September	June
Northern Territory
Yirrkala	August	March, May, June
Nguiu (Wurrumiyanga)	August	June
Wadeye	September	May
Gunbalanya	September	June
Maningrida	September	March
Numbulwar	September
Ngukurr	September
Umbakumba	September
Angurugu	September
Galiwin’ku	September	May
Gapuwiyak	September	March, May
Milingimbi	September
Hermannsburg (Ntaria)	October	April, May
Lajamanu	October	May
Yuendumu	October	May
Queensland
Mornington Island	October	May, June
Doomadgee	October	June
Aurukun	November
Coen	November	March
Hope Vale	November	March
Mossman Gorge	November	May
South Australia
Amata	November	May
Mimili	November	May
Western Australia
Beagle Bay	September
Ardyaloon (One Arm Point)/Djarradjin/Lombadina	September	February, June
Halls Creek	September	April, June
Fitzroy Crossing	September	April, June

The Coordinator General has made a number of formal presentations to meetings and workshops. This has been an opportunity to build understanding of, and advocate for, the new approach under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery.

Back to top

We are committed to promoting transparency and driving change through the use of communication tools. The key mechanism for this has been the development of a website which details progress by place.

The website was designed to be a useful space dedicated to the Remote Service Delivery National Partnership Agreement. The aim has been to provide information on the OCGRIS, the 29 priority communities, and publications and presentations and to provide exposure for good news stories, particularly relating to progress in the 29 priority communities. These stories have helped to maintain momentum in implementing the new partnership.

Our website has maintained a steady rate of use throughout the year, with an average of 15,000 hits per week. The average length of stay was 16 minutes, reflecting its use as an information resource. Figure L-4 shows that the release of the report caused a big increase, but that use has remained steady throughout the year.

Figure L-4Website hits, per week, October 2009 to July 2010

Description of Figure L-4

Through the 'Contact us' section, we received 35 requests for information.

Back to top