Executive summary
- Community wellbeing
- Early childhood and families
- Young people
- Seniors and intergenerational programs
- Overall summary
This study posed two principal questions of the Stronger Communities element of the
Commonwealth Government's Stronger Families and Communities Strategy:
- What is the evidence that prevention and early intervention programs promote the development of stronger communities and create measurable positive social outcomes?
- What is the evidence that there is a cost-benefit to be achieved by government supporting such programs?
Substantial evidence to answer these questions is presented in the report. From this evidence, it may be concluded that:
- prevention and early intervention programs do contribute to the promotion of strong communities and to positive social outcomes—furthermore, they do so in a way that enables communities to continue to deal with issues through their own resilience and capacities; and
- prevention and early intervention programs contribute to community building and positive social outcomes in a cost-effective way—in many instances, these cost-benefits are demonstrably cumulative.
A large number of programs are reviewed and the evidence from cost-benefit analysis shows that a wide range of programs are successful both in terms of their dollar value as well as building stronger and healthy communities. Many studies highlight the economic savings that can be achieved through prevention and early intervention.
As well as the economic benefits, many programs referred to outcomes that are linked both directly and indirectly to the stronger communities' indicators—that is, knowledge and community skills, including volunteering; networks and partnerships in communities; leadership in communities; local solutions to local problems; and community capacity to use best practice.
Many of the programs surveyed were developed in response to particular social indicators (such as juvenile crime, poor educational achievement, homelessness) rather than being established with the primary objective of strengthening communities. In addition, most programs were delivered within a context narrower than the broader community—for example, schools, families. Notwithstanding, explicit links to the broader community was a critical component to the success of many programs. Therefore, programs delivered in environments such as schools and families are capable of producing outcomes that contribute to stronger and healthier communities. Further examination is warranted of prevention and early intervention as strategies for community building that focus on strengthening communities as a means of developing social capital.
Some specific conclusions may be drawn from the various areas covered in this study.
Community wellbeing
The analysis of community wellbeing (the physical, mental and social wellbeing of people) showed that there is increasing recognition of the importance of community participation and the role that community groups play in developing healthy communities. In particular the analysis shows:
- the building of trust and reciprocity leads to an increased social capital, which is an important ingredient of healthy communities; and
- there is significant research to support the notion that people with diverse networks of quality relationships are healthier than people who are socially isolated.
Keys to building healthier and therefore stronger communities are:
- structures in place to identify community leaders and other highly-motivated community members; and
- the inputs of relevant professionals working in the community are mobilised and where these skills are utilised in a multi-disciplinary framework.
The building of social capital through community-based programs is also facilitated where opportunities exist:
- to enable skills development in areas such as organising groups, running meetings, lobbying, the writing of grant applications, and so on;
- to enable the identification of funding sources and the capacity to bid for these funds; and
- to build better links with other community groups and organisations, to publicise achievements and, in turn, to access information about other communities' achievements.
Early childhood and families
The literature reviewed clearly establishes the benefits of community-based early childhood and family prevention and intervention programs. The benefits arise from both the cost effectiveness of many of the programs as well as in building stronger and healthier families and, in turn, stronger and healthier communities. The premise for early childhood prevention and early intervention programs is the recognition that a child's development in the first few years of life sets the foundation for life-long learning, behaviour and health outcomes.
It is apparent from the review of the literature that:
- a combined approach which links community-based programs with individual prevention and ameliorative programs targeted at at-risk children provides superior outcomes;
- similar conclusions can be drawn for family support programs—community-based programs build resilience and protective factors which address the structural causes of disadvantage in ways which are not addressed by individual programs alone;
- by building social networks and empowering communities, self-reliance and protective factors are strengthened (and there is some evidence that dependency on individual programs is thereby reduced); and
- because of the complexity and multi-dimensional nature of many social problems affecting children and families (for example, child abuse, maltreatment, and so on ), community- based initiatives that are integrated with government programs, and which address combinations of problems, are likely to produce more socially and cost-effective results.
The study shows the importance of prevention and intervention programs that are initiated early in the child's life. This is for three reasons:
- When programs are directed at families with children who have yet to complete primary school, they are more effective in terms of social outcomes (such as reduced substance abuse, reduced maltreatment, reduced future involvement with the justice system, increased school completion rates, future employment and so on).
- Considerably greater cost-benefits may be seen in terms of program expenditure per participant.
- The importance of education and schools is emphasised, as is the importance of the active involvement of parents and other primary care givers.
Young people
There is overwhelming evidence that for many community-based programs directed at the early prevention of social disadvantage through unemployment or homelessness and/or anti- social behaviours in young people, economic and social benefits are delivered way in excess of the costs of the programs. Key factors which contribute to effective programs are that:
- it is important that programs address the 'whole-of-community'—society-wide social and economic forces which impact upon young people make it difficult for some of them to avoid the risk factors which lead to unemployment or homelessness or to destructive or anti-social behaviours; and
- whole-of-person and whole-of community approaches which coordinate appropriate service delivery are more likely to address these society-wide factors through building resilience and protective barriers.
A dominant theme in the literature was the claim schools are critical in terms of laying the foundation for healthy participation in society. 'Instructionally-effective' schools are also effective in reducing the potential for individuals to engage in delinquency. In addition, such schools increase the chances of achieving the educational and social skills necessary to enter employment and to avoid marginalisation.
In the area of crime prevention, early intervention is crucial:
- in minimising future involvement as an offender in the criminal justice system—the more that young people become involved in the criminal justice system, the more likely it is that they will continue to offend; and
- in reducing the costs of crime—both prosecution of crime and incarceration are expensive and far in excess of the cost of effective prevention and early intervention programs.
In addition:
- Small size programs (with small caseloads) appear to be more effective than larger scale programs.
- Programs that include job training appear to reduce recidivism, as well as reduce substance abuse and other destructive behaviour.
- Such programs also tend to engender a preference for work over welfare.
Seniors and intergenerational programs
Seniors are often addressed by social policy as the recipients of services. While this is important, it is not the whole picture. Seniors also embody much accumulated social capital, and they often exercise local leadership and provide a major source of voluntary effort. The conclusions which may be drawn from the evidence are that:
- programs to facilitate seniors contributing voluntary effort in the community are most effective when they receive infrastructure funding and when they are organised or coordinated;
- the levels of funding for volunteer activities are low relative to the costs of professional services;
- the work that can be performed is of a different nature—however, there are benefits arising from the voluntary work of seniors that augments professional effort;
- there are the positive gains for seniors themselves from having an active and valued role;
and
- some programs have quantifiable cost-benefits in the short-term (first order), while all have predictable longer-term cost-benefits, although these are less easy to quantify (second order)—however, it is clear that these longer-term benefits are key elements of stronger communities and the development of social capital.
Overall summary
Although there are some quite significant differences between the four major areas of programs that have been examined in this study, there are also several key issues that may be identified as general findings that span the field.
First, there is a clear predominance of programs either based in schools or working through schools as a community resource. Not only are schools essential for the development of future generations of citizens (investing in social capital), but also schools are a focal point for most communities. Networks develop around focal points, shared interests and opportunities for people to meet.
Second, best practice in prevention and early intervention and best practice in community building have much in common. Not only are prevention and early intervention best located in community settings and most effective when they respond to local conditions, but community building too may be more effective when it is addressed at the early stage of identifying community problems.
Third, inheritance of social capital requires that it is actively 'passed on' between generations and nurtured by older members of communities. The intergenerational programs discussed should not be seen in isolation, but many of them could be viewed from the perspective of the other main areas. Communities consist of all generations and strong communities show evidence of positive intergenerational relationships.
Fourth, community involvement and participation is a factor in all community-based programs. This includes local leadership, volunteering, civic trust, networks and partnerships between people and between institutions. Where professionals are involved, they are more effective from a community-building perspective if they respond to local context, work in multi- disciplinary ways and adopt facilitative approaches as much as possible. It is also an indicator of strength in communities when the various sectors (government, business, non-government welfare, community groups and individuals) work together towards positive social outcomes.
Fifth, government support for programs is appropriate for two reasons. It is important as seed money, especially in communities where the erosion of civil society can be seen to have had an impact (through rising crime rates, high levels of child abuse, isolation of seniors, and so on). At the same time, there is strong evidence that by adopting an active role in community building, there is great potential for government to make downstream savings on the projected levels of spending on resolving social problems. Early intervention programs that encourage community building are cost-effective.
Sixth, although many of the programs reviewed in this study have a family focus, this is not in contradiction with community building. The programs that were examined all achieve the promotion of stronger communities, and many of them do so through the interventions with families on which they are based. Families are a key element to strong communities because they are a primary building block of the social fabric.
Through a meta-analysis of available evaluative literature, this study has demonstrated the value of prevention and early intervention programs. These are a key dimension to promoting stronger communities that display the characteristics of a civil society in which social capital is nurtured for the benefit of the whole community.