Grandparents Raising Grandchildren response to FSP consultation 

Yes the overview of the operational framework in terms of the six key requirements covers engagement of families, communities, flexible service delivery options, collaborative practice, data gathering, evidence based service delivery and financial management inclusive of government and non-government requirements.

It will be the underlying detail of each key requirement that will need extensive consultation, effort and consistency in terms of implementation by both government and the non-government sector.

Flexible service models can be built, by firstly designing a state mapping of FSP currently funded services.  Secondly regionalising the mapping of current services through the funding of project liaison positions who regionally network these services.

The FSP regional network meets on a regular basis, initially exploring similarities and differences, then developing MOU’s in terms of service delivery linkages and referrals. 

Through this network process, the service system designs ways to adequately support and engage both universal and targeted client groups in that region.  The design would be locality driven in terms of service location, outreach opportunities and collaborative working practices that eventually could support the whole of family in terms of their needs.

This model would enable rural / regional services to enhance service delivery practices however adequate resources in terms of staffing allocation and long-term funding will be required in terms of engaging with both universal and targeted client groups.

For example; we are currently funded by Strengthening Families National Illicit Drug Strategy to support Grandparents Raising Grandchildren.  If we are funded past April 2010 and are partners in the FSP regional network we would be able to more easily link both the grandparent and the child to relevant services within this FS system in terms of the presenting need at any particular time.  What this means is the targeted group is supported through a systems network that can wrap a suit of services around that family reducing systems silo functions, as currently exists for this grandparent group and their grandchildren they care and protect.  The parents of the children could also be supported by the suit of services therefore responding holistically to the family’s need for support.

However, in terms of this target group grandparents raising grandchildren, I am of the understanding that no other state has specific FaHCSIA funding to service this group. The grandparent target group requires either funding specific service within the FS program or ensuring relevant materials pertaining to this group is designed and distributed by those services within the FS program.

The initial state and regional mapping of services and establishment of the FSP network is necessary prior to the implantation of service delivery with a ‘no wrong door’ approach.

Improvement in service delivery in any core FSP stream could be enhanced by the design of a Common Assessment Tool which is inclusive of all client groups and used across the stream by all services.  Formal MOU’s and referral system with client consent to share their information where the Assessment Tool is faxed or emailed to the relevant services within the FSP stream.  The relevant service for that client would then have information pertaining to the client presenting issues so as to then work with that client on a case plan.  This would enhance a ‘no wrong door’ approach after FSP services have been promoted within the stream and the wider community.

Linkages with other Commonwealth programs, state / territory services such as child protection and mental health services could be made from cross network regional meetings via a representative of the FSP network on a regular basis enabling the enhancement of client service delivery.  For example; in Tasmania the FSP network could participate with the State Government funded Family Support programs Gateway and Integrated Family Support Service system that is implemented through a consortium within four regions across the state.

A set of standards for staff delivering any FSP service would need to be broad in terms of the types of services being delivered and the impact of the recruitment of staff with varying types of existing qualifications and or experience in the field.

Perhaps the FSP could refer to the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program that has spent many years on the development of standards.  In Tasmania the SAAP funded the contract with Quality Management Services to work with the sector in ensuring consistent standard development and service implementation over a number of years.

Information sharing is important across services and service systems in terms of legislative changes, quality practice and gaining an understanding of client groups needs and presenting issues. On top of this specifically in terms of grandparents raising grandchildren where there has been little development of a framework of practice projects such as Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Tasmania have developed a practice framework that we share within the wider service system to assist in sector worker’s gaining knowledge of ‘how to work with grandparents raising their grandchildren.

Data collection is imperative in order to know who, what, how and when and provides for a mapping of groups, numbers, age, issues so as to inform service delivery.

Resources can be shared however there needs to be a mapping of FSP services within each region of a state in terms of existing resources, gaps and like type services that may identify opportunities for resource sharing.  Resource sharing including offices, administrative processes, workers, products needs to be mapped out by agencies to ensure collaborative participation, understandings, opportunities and the mechanics of how to go about the sharing.

Factors to be considered in determining the range of FSP services required for a region or community could be estimated based on current data in terms of waiting lists for service and the broader population figures. 

Other factors include city, rural, regional, remote areas, transport systems, service outreach capacity and information / help phone-lines current and those needed to be established.

A FSP service system approach needs a promotional kit of the suit of services it is able to provide based on a regional approach in Tasmania for example.  The suit of services kit would be relevant to both universal and targeted client groups as well as the wider service sector in the provision of a ‘no wrong door’ approach.

In a state like Tasmania service delivery areas are usually based on three or four regions which include South West, South East, North (inclusive of North East) and North West (inclusive of West Coast, Circular Head). 

Confining programs such as Communities for Children into municipality areas of which there are three in Tasmania excludes target groups outside of the municipalities. In terms of a ‘no wrong door’ approach of a FSP system the Communities for Children model needs to be expanded on a state wide level.

Under the National Child Protection Framework Outcome 4.2 Enhanced support for grandparent and kinship carers as a specified target group under the Communities for Children program would actually exclude the majority of Grandparents raising their grandchildren in Tasmania in terms of the current model.  The Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Tasmania project data can provide detailed information in terms of location of grandparent families and ages of the children they care for. 

Balance could be achieved between giving providers funding security, managing performance and ensuring services are located in areas of need by FaHCSIA applying the ‘Results Based Accountability’ framework as used by the NSW Family Services Inc.   http://www.resultsaccountability.com/PDF%20files/AU%20NSW%20FAMS%20Report%20Card%202008.pdf

Good performance in the FSP could be identified via the ‘Results Based Accountability Framework.

The three fundamental RBA questions are ‘How much did we do’, ‘How well did we do it’ and ‘Is anyone better off’. 

The RBA framework is applied to all levels of the organisation from working with clients, staff, management, the board ensuring and the funding body, a consistent reporting format at all levels.

The fundamentals of the RBA Framework include:

• Identifying a Result, which is a desired outcome or goal stated plainly and clearly, such as “Children Ready for School.”
• Choosing an Indicator, a measure that represents progress on the result. For example, third-grade reading scores can help determine whether children were ready for school when they entered kindergarten.
• Outlining a Strategy, a collection of actions that has a well-reasoned chance of achieving the desired result.

Outcomes in the FSP would be measured via the ‘Results Based Accountability’ Framework.

Systems and processes within FSP need to be centralised however enable to respond flexibly to the diversity of programs / services needs in terms of implementation.

Results accountability is accountability by the community (city, county or state) to the community (city, county or state) for the well-being (results) of a population (children, adults, families, all citizens...). results accountability is a different way of thinking. It organizes the work of programs, agencies, communities, cities, counties and states around the end conditions we seek for those who live in our community. It uses those end conditions as the grounding for all of the work, including decision making and budgeting.

Reference Results Based Accountability’ Mark Friedman

Results Based Accountability website(www.raguide.org)

Naming up the size of the available resources to key stakeholders.

The distribution of available resources to be based on current data that has been collected via current funded services to inform of demand on services.

Consideration of distribution of resources also needs to be given to gaps that have been identified in the various evaluations made of currently funded services that are now located in the FSP.

An audit of Universal program needs and targeted program needs ensuring distribution of resources correlates to both groups.

Linkages of both Federal, State Government and Non-government agencies in terms of systems funded, not funded – a mapping exercise perhaps which could identify duplications and gaps.