Appendix B: Analysis of Indigenous questionnaire responses
Initial questionnaire
Number of respondents
Sixty-six Indigenous Strategy projects responded to the initial questionnaire and the response rate for individual questions ranged from 56 to 66 projects.
Indigenous responses
Responses indicate that the most common way in which projects found out about the Strategy were word of mouth (47 per cent) and directly from FaCS (55 per cent).
Responses indicate a high level of community involvement in projects.
- 91 per cent of projects 'spoke or worked with individuals within the community' in enlisting support for developing and setting up their project.
- 85 per cent of projects 'spoke or worked with other community organisations, clubs or community groups' in enlisting support for developing and setting up their project.
- 80 per cent of respondents indicated that the idea for the project had come from the community.
- 97 per cent of projects involved community members in the identification of local issues or possible ways to address them.
- 86 per cent of projects stated that community members or groups had taken on key roles in developing and setting up their project.
- 58 per cent of projects indicated that community involvement had 'contributed a lot' to their project, with a further 38 per cent of respondents stating that it had 'contributed a fair bit'.
- 51 per cent stated that the process of carrying out community consultations to set up the project 'worked very well', with a further 37 per cent stating that it 'worked well'.
Responses indicate that FaCS is seen as a valuable source of project support by most projects.
- 51 per cent stated that FaCS support 'worked very well', with a further 33 per cent stating that it 'worked well'.
- 40 per cent stated that the process for finding information about the Strategy needed when setting up the project 'worked very well', with a further 38 per cent stating that it 'worked well'.
- 41 per cent stated that the process of preparing and lodging an application for Strategy funding 'worked very well', with a further 41 per cent indicating that it 'worked well'.
- 30 per cent stated that the process of obtaining final approval for Strategy funding 'worked very well', with a further 42 per cent stating that it 'worked well'.
- 29 per cent stated that the Strategy guidelines 'worked very well', with a further 53 per cent stating that they 'worked well'.
Responses indicate that support provided by the auspice organisation was important in setting up projects.
- 56 per cent stated that auspice support had 'worked very well', with a further 28 per cent indicating that it 'worked well'.
- 21 per cent stated that the idea for the Strategy project had come from the auspice organisation, with a further 43 per cent stating that it had come jointly from both inside and outside the auspice organisation.
- 73 per cent stated that the auspice organisation would be involved in planning and running the Strategy project.
- 97 per cent stated that their auspice organisation existed before the Strategy project.
- 95 per cent stated that the auspice was involved in running other activities in addition to the Strategy project.
- 42 per cent stated that the Strategy project was part of a larger existing project.
Responses suggest that support from FaCS and/or the auspice organisation were not the only factors impacting on projects.
- 70 per cent stated that there were also 'other significant factors that were helpful when setting up the project'.
- 66 per cent stated that there were also 'other significant factors that created problems when setting up the project'.
- Only 26 per cent of projects had spoken or worked with local businesses and 38 per cent with local government in enlisting support for developing and setting up their project.
Indigenous responses compared with responses from non-Indigenous projects
There were a few discernable differences in responses to the initial questionnaire between Indigenous and non-Indigenous projects.
A higher proportion of Indigenous projects rated the community consultation process when setting up projects as working very well (51 per cent compared to 35 per cent of non-Indigenous projects). This difference between Indigenous and non-Indigenous projects reduced when ratings of the process of community consultation as 'worked well' and 'worked very well' were totalled (88 per cent of Indigenous projects rated community consultation processes as working very well or working well, compared with 82 per cent of non-Indigenous projects).
Indigenous projects were less likely to have heard about the project from a local government or shire council (2 per cent compared with 12 per cent of non-Indigenous projects) and were also less likely to have spoken or worked with a local government in developing the project (38 per cent compared with 58 per cent of non-Indigenous projects).
Indigenous projects were also less likely to have found out about the Strategy through a website (3 per cent compared with 8 per cent of non-Indigenous projects).
The idea for the project was more likely to have come from the community when it was an Indigenous project (80 per cent) than when it was a non-Indigenous project (62 per cent). Community members or groups were also more likely to take on key roles in developing and setting up the project (86 per cent compared with 72 per cent of non-Indigenous projects).
Indigenous projects were more likely to have 'other significant factors' that created problems when setting up the project (66 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (49 per cent). However, they were also more likely to have 'other significant factors' that were helpful when setting up the project (70 per cent of Indigenous projects compared with 60 per cent of non-Indigenous projects). Indigenous projects were also less likely to have spoken to, or worked with local businesses (26 per cent) when setting up the project than non-Indigenous projects (33 per cent).
Final questionnaire
Number of respondents
Fifty-five projects responded to the final questionnaire; however the response rate for individual questions varied. Some projects completed a longer, earlier version of the questionnaire (the length of the final questionnaire was reduced in response to feedback from projects) and projects that were still continuing completed an interim version of the final questionnaire.
Response rates to individual questions varied from 8 to 56 projects. Some care is required in interpreting final questionnaire responses for Indigenous projects where there were small response numbers to questions. The response rate from Indigenous projects is shown after each question in brackets.
Major project activities
In the final questionnaire projects were asked about major and minor project activities. Table B1 shows the proportion of Indigenous projects that directly provided the following services to participating families.
| Activities that provided services directly to participating families |
Major activity Indigenous |
Major activity non-Indigenous |
Major or minor activity Indigenous |
Major or minor activity non-Indigenous |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentoring or role modelling (55) | 58 | 43 | 74 | 74 |
| Directly supporting families to develop healthy relationships—for example, supported playgroups (55) |
53 | 44 | 78 | 67 |
| Counselling and other practical assistance, for example, youth bush camps, life skills courses (55) |
40 | 39 | 73 | 66 |
| Providing assistance to allow people to participate in other activities—for example, providing transport or child care (54) |
35 | 33 | 66 | 68 |
| Providing group parenting programs (54) | 20 | 34 | 39 | 49 |
| Case management (54) | 17 | 13 | 32 | 32 |
The following table shows the proportions of projects engaged in activities that supported communities.
| Activities that supported communities and facilitated community capacity building |
Major activity Indigenous |
Major activity non-Indigenous |
Major or minor activity Indigenous |
Major or minor activity non-Indigenous |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bringing community members together—for example, women's centres (56) |
64 | 65 | 87 | 90 |
| Community consultation (55) | 62 | 57 | 97 | 88 |
| Skills development training for members of the community (20) |
57 | 60 | 83 | 77 |
| Initiating or running a significant community or cultural event (55) |
40 | 31 | 69 | 58 |
Projects also undertook activities that developed organisational capacity and enhanced relationships among service providers as shown in Table B3.
| Activities that developed organisational capacity and relationships among service providers |
Major activity Indigenous |
Major activity non-Indigenous |
Major or minor activity Indigenous |
Major or minor activity non-Indigenous |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developing and enhancing networks and linkages, for example, partnerships between services or organisations, referring or linking clients to other services (54) |
76 | 77 | 91 | 95 |
| Training project staff or volunteers to do the project's work (46) |
52 | 53 | 87 | 78 |
| Undertaking systematic action research (53) |
28 | 35 | 47 | 62 |
| Education/training of service providers outside the project (45) |
22 | 23 | 55 | 63 |
Over half of the Indigenous Strategy projects (52 per cent) responding to the questionnaire identified the development of resources to support families, communities or agencies as major project activity.
Project achievements
Most projects expressed satisfaction with project achievements as shown in Table B4.
| How much has the project achieved of what you wanted it to? (34) |
Indigenous projects | Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Exceeded what we wanted | 27 | 35 |
| Achieved all of what we wanted | 8 | 23 |
| Achieved most of what we wanted | 44 | 33 |
| Achieved some of what we wanted | 13 | 6 |
| Made some progress toward what we wanted | 6 | 3 |
| Made little or no progress towards what we wanted | 2 | - |
Questionnaire responses indicate that Indigenous projects were more likely to experience unanticipated positive outcomes than unexpected negative outcomes as shown in Table B5.
| Were there any unexpected outcomes? | Indigenous projects | Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Unexpected positive outcomes (51) | 75 | 82 |
| Unexpected negative outcomes (49) | 53 | 44 |
Eighty per cent of Indigenous projects expected further changes for participants or others in the community, after the expiry of current Strategy funding.
A majority of respondents thought that projects would continue beyond the period of Strategy funding as shown in Table B6.
| How likely is it that the project will continue or further develop after the current Strategy funding agreement is completed? (47) |
Indigenous projects | Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Very likely | 55 | 44 |
| Likely | 28 | 32 |
| Unlikely | 9 | 15 |
| Very unlikely | 9 | 9 |
Factors contributing to project achievements
Respondents identified whether a range of factors had been either very helpful or helpful, or very important or important in contributing to project achievements as shown in Table B7.
| Factors that influenced achievements of the project | Very helpful/important plus helpful or important Indigenous |
Very helpful/important plus helpful or important Non-Indigenous |
|---|---|---|
| Overall helpfulness of the Strategy and FaCS (13) | 100 | 87 |
| Identifying and responding to community issues (49) | 96 | 92 |
| Community support (49) | 94 | 88 |
| Local partnerships and networks (49) | 94 | 94 |
| The people involved (49) | 94 | 94 |
| Support from FaCS during the project (13) | 92 | 71 |
| Strategy funding (51) | 90 | 96 |
| Support from the auspice organisation (49) | 83 | 87 |
| Flexibility and adaptability of the Strategy and FaCS (49) | 83 | 79 |
| Other services or activities within your community (49) | 74 | 73 |
| Activities carried out by the auspice organisation before the project began (49) | 74 | 83 |
| Activities carried out by the auspice organisation during the project—other than the project itself (49) | 70 | 79 |
| Community had previous experience with similar projects (48) | 67 | 74 |
| Activities carried out by other organisations during the project (41) | 65 | 73 |
| Activities carried out by other organisations before the project began (49) | 55 | 64 |
| Other activities | 54 | 34 |
| Local conditions (49) | 47 | 67 |
Partnerships
Partnerships have been an important component of Strategy projects. Table B8 shows the types of partners involved in projects.
| Types of partners | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Non-government (36) | 75 | 89 |
| Community group (37) | 86 | 90 |
| State government (36) | 69 | 65 |
| Indigenous organisation (39) | 97 | 39 |
| Local government or shire council (35) | 66 | 72 |
| Private sector (33) | 42 | 62 |
| Australian government (33) | 52 | 53 |
| Other (21) | 29 | 36 |
As shown in Table B9 almost a quarter of the partnerships formed by Indigenous projects did not exist before the project commenced.
| Were any of the partnerships formed before the project started? (42) |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| All were formed before | 14 | 6 |
| Most were formed before | 21 | 21 |
| Some were formed before | 38 | 56 |
| None were formed before | 24 | 15 |
| Not applicable | 2 | 3 |
The majority of partnerships operated as informal working relationships although some partnerships were formalised to varying degrees as shown in Table B10.
| Type of arrangements with partners | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Formal, legally binding agreements (43) | 21 | 22 |
| Semi-formal written agreements (47) | 43 | 41 |
| Informal working relationships with partners (48) | 88 | 89 |
Table B11 shows the types of activities undertaken by partnerships during the development and implementation of projects.
| Activities with partners | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Identifying needs and opportunities within the local community (49) | 94 | 90 |
| Networking, exchanging or providing staff, knowledge, experience or expertise to each other (49) | 90 | 91 |
| Undertaking project activities together (either as a part of the project or in conjunction with the project) (49) | 90 | 91 |
| Identifying local community strengths or advantages that could be used (49) | 90 | 86 |
| Participatory decision making (48) | 85 | 80 |
| Referring participants between the partners for services or activities (49) | 82 | 82 |
| Preparing funding submissions (48) | 63 | 60 |
| Other (28) | 32 | 28 |
Most projects considered partnerships as very important, as shown in Table B12.
| Importance of partners to the project (44) | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Very important | 84 | 77 |
| Important | 14 | 19 |
| Not important | 2 | 4 |
Most Indigenous projects considered that the Strategy had contributed either 'a lot' or 'a fair bit' to the enhancement of partnerships, as shown in Table B13.
| How much did the project contribute to enhanced partnerships? (7) |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Contributed a lot | 29 | 50 |
| Contributed a fair bit | 57 | 33 |
| Contributed a little | 14 | 10 |
| Not applicable | 0 | 8 |
The likelihood that many partnerships will continue beyond the Strategy funding period, as shown in Table B14, suggests that an increased capacity to work in partnership is a legacy of the Strategy.
| Will any of the new partnerships continue after the current Strategy funding period is completed? (35) |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| All are likely to continue | 37 | 36 |
| Most are likely to continue | 37 | 29 |
| Some are likely to continue | 20 | 27 |
| None are likely to continue | 3 | 5 |
| Not applicable | 3 | 3 |
Support and resources used by projects
Projects indicated that they were currently receiving financial support, in addition to Strategy funding, from various sources, as shown in Table B15.
| Sources of additional funding | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Government (40) | 33 | 24 |
| Other sources (36) | 31 | 27 |
| State or territory government (38) | 26 | 27 |
| Self funding (36) | 25 | 34 |
| Other non-government organisation or community group (40) | 23 | 32 |
| Local government or shire council (38) | 18 | 31 |
| Indigenous Land Council or other Indigenous community organisations (42) | 14 | 1 |
| Private sector (37) | 11 | 23 |
Non-financial support, in a variety of forms, was also important. Table B16 shows the different types of non-financial support used by projects.
| Non-financial support received | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Community support (47) | 91 | 86 |
| Indigenous community organisation or corporation (46) | 89 | 19 |
| In kind support (47) | 87 | 84 |
| Support of existing networks, linkages and referrals (48) | 83 | 91 |
| Volunteer time (44) | 75 | 82 |
| Employment and training programs (45) | 60 | 21 |
| Professional services (43) | 53 | 59 |
| Other (32) | 16 | 18 |
Organisational capacity building
Eight projects responded to the earlier version of the final questionnaire that asked whether the auspice organisation had changed during the project. One Indigenous project (13 per cent) reported a change of auspice.
Projects indicated that there have been some changes in the capacity of the auspice organisation during the course of the project; the low response rates to this question, as shown in Table B17, suggest that these findings be interpreted with caution.
| Have any of the following areas of your auspice organisation changed for the better through having been involved in this project? |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| The ability to respond to your target group or project participants (8) | 63 | 72 |
| The ability to find and work with partners (8) | 63 | 60 |
| Management, systems and processes (8) | 43 | 32 |
| Infrastructure and facilities (8) | 29 | 35 |
Likelihood of projects continuing or further developing
A majority of projects considered that it was either likely, or very likely, that the project would continue or further develop after the current Strategy funding agreement had been completed as shown in Table B18.
| How likely is it that the project will continue or further develop after the current Strategy funding agreement is completed? (47) |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Very likely | 55 | 44 |
| Likely | 28 | 32 |
| Unlikely | 9 | 15 |
| Very unlikely | 9 | 9 |
Projects were asked about the form that the project would take if it continued or developed further. Table B19 shows the potential for further development identified by respondents to the questionnaire.
| If the project was to continue to develop further what form would it take? | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Continue the project with the current activities and target groups (46) | 70 | 61 |
| Run a similar project with new target groups (46) | 28 | 27 |
| Run a similar project at a different location or in a different community (46) | 26 | 26 |
| Run a similar project with new activities and the same target groups, building on the previous work (46) | 41 | 46 |
| Other (46) | 22 | 27 |
Table B20 clearly shows that projects anticipate that a range of financial and non-financial resources and support will be needed to continue or build on current achievements.
| Will any of the following support and resources be needed to continue or build on the achievements of the project? |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Funding (48) | 98 | 89 |
| Specific expertise and skills including professional services (48) | 85 | 73 |
| Community support (48) | 81 | 77 |
| Support of existing networks, linkages and referrals (48) | 77 | 55 |
| Volunteer time (48) | 77 | 70 |
| In kind support (48) | 75 | 78 |
| Indigenous community organisation or corporation (48) | 71 | 47 |
| Employment and training programs (48) | 52 | 32 |
| Other (48) | 10 | 14 |
Most projects indicated an intention to apply for further funding as shown in Table B21.
| Sources of further funding that projects intend to apply for | Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Government (10) | 80 | 84 |
| Other sources (10) | 20 | 21 |
| State or local government (10) | 90 | 60 |
| Other non-government organisation or community group (10) | 50 | 42 |
| Local government or shire council (10) | 30 | 42 |
| Indigenous Land Council or other Indigenous community organisations (10) | 60 | 11 |
| Private sector (10) | 60 | 41 |
Projects were asked whether there were any other factors that would affect whether or not the project continues beyond the current Strategy funding agreement. The response rate for this question was low so care should be taken when drawing interpretations from the data presented in Table B22.
| Are there any other factors that would affect whether or not the project continues beyond the current Strategy funding agreement? (10) |
Indigenous projects |
Non-Indigenous projects |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 50 | 19 |
| No | 50 | 81 |
Indigenous responses compared with responses from non-Indigenous projects
When the responses provided by Indigenous projects are compared with the responses provided by all Strategy projects, some discernible differences in the pattern of responses are apparent. Care is required in interpretation in respect of apparent differences between Indigenous projects and others, because of the small Indigenous project sample size.
Project activities
In terms of project activities Indigenous projects were less likely to provide group parenting programs (a major or minor activity in 39 per cent of Indigenous projects compared to 49 per cent of non-Indigenous projects). Activities that directly supported families to develop healthy relationships—for example, playgroups—were more likely to be a major or minor activity of Indigenous projects (78 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (67 per cent).
Project achievements
When rating the level of achievement of the project, Indigenous projects were less likely to rate projects as having either exceeded expectations or achieved most of what was wanted (35 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (58 per cent).
Factors that influenced achievements
Local conditions were rated as very unhelpful by a higher proportion of Indigenous projects (29 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (12 per cent).
The support received from FaCS during the implementation of the project was considered either very helpful or helpful by 92 per cent of Indigenous projects while 71 per cent of non-Indigenous projects rated this support as either helpful or very helpful. Similarly 100 per cent of Indigenous projects rated the overall helpfulness of the Strategy and FaCS as either very helpful or helpful compared with 87 per cent of non-Indigenous projects.
Activities carried out by the auspice organisation before the project began were rated as very important by 60 per cent of non-Indigenous projects compared with 45 per cent of Indigenous projects.
It was more likely that there were other significant factors reported as being helpful to the project achieving its goals by Indigenous projects (78 per cent) as compared to non-Indigenous projects (47 per cent).
Partnerships
Indigenous projects were less likely to partner with non-government organisations (75 per cent) than non-Indigenous organisations (89 per cent). This may reflect an absence of non-government organisations to partner with in some locations. Indigenous projects were also less likely to partner with private businesses (42 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (62 per cent).
Not surprisingly, only 39 per cent of non-Indigenous projects partnered with an Indigenous organisation compared with 97 per cent of Indigenous projects.
FaCS was much more likely to have been involved in identifying and forming partnerships with Indigenous projects (45 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (15 per cent).
Project funding and support
Fewer Indigenous projects had some self funding (25 per cent) compared with non-Indigenous projects (34 per cent).
Indigenous projects were also less likely to have received funding from local government (18 per cent) than non-Indigenous projects (31 per cent).
The private sector contributed funds to 11 per cent of Indigenous projects compared with 23 per cent of non-Indigenous projects. It is interesting to note that 60 per cent of Indigenous projects planned to apply for further funding from the private sector compared with 41 per cent of non-Indigenous projects.
A higher proportion of Indigenous projects (60 per cent) stated that they received employment and training support compared with non-Indigenous projects (21 per cent).
Support and resources need to continue or build on achievements
Indigenous organisations were more likely to identify a need for the support of:
- Indigenous community organisations (71 per cent) compared with 47 per cent of non-Indigenous projects
- existing networks, linkages and referrals (77 per cent) compared with 55 per cent
- employment and training programs (52 per cent) compared with 32 per cent.
Another (hardly surprising) difference is that non-Indigenous Strategy projects were less likely to attract, or plan to seek support from Indigenous organisations.
Indigenous Lands Councils or other Indigenous organisations provided funding for 14 per cent of Indigenous projects and non-financial support to 89 per cent of Indigenous projects compared with financial support for 1 per cent of non-Indigenous projects and non-financial support for 19 per cent of non-Indigenous projects (which include Indigenous families and communities).
Eleven per cent of non-Indigenous projects intended to apply for further funds from the Indigenous community sector compared with 60 per cent of Indigenous projects.
Future expectations
When asked how likely it was that the auspice organisation would take on new activities given what has happened with the project, 25 per cent of Indigenous organisations responded that this would be very unlikely compared with 16 per cent of non-Indigenous projects.