Theme 1: Program Operational Framework
- Does the draft program operational framework and six key requirements in the discussion paper identify all the key factors that will support the more effective delivery of FSP services?
UnitingCare Wesley Adelaide supports the move towards improvements in areas such as:
- Strengthening collaboration
- Improving access to service provision
- Ensuring families and children are linked with other services
- Offering more flexible services delivery approaches
- Operating within outcome based accountability frameworks
- Improving business environment for providers.
There appears to be within the discussion paper an emphasis on collaboration both among FSP service providers and within the broader community. This is certainly a product we aspire to, however there are still some questions we have regarding this, particularly concerning a 'no wrong door policy.'
Some more detail would be sought concerning questions such as:
- How can we as a sector develop structures that will ensure clients confidentiality does not become compromised if one or more services are discussing that particular client's situation?
- How can a level of openness and trust be fostered between FSP and other services, where we can work towards a confidence that clients will receive similar service messages wherever they go? The reality at the moment from anecdotal evidence from clients, is that they can go to a variety of different services and receive a variety of different messages regarding issues such as child safety, mental health, family violence.
- Given this, is it important for FSP services to develop common assessment tools around issues such as family violence and child protection if we are to work towards providing a seamless approach?
Additional to the above comments, the notion of a no wrong door approach is an interesting one considering the current situation of our FRSP services. If one considers Family and Relationships counselling, for example, our practitioners encounter a myriad of presenting concerns which they do not always refer on because of the logistics of a particular client accessing service for issues which could include some or all of family violence, separation, legal issues, mental health, parenting, child protection and drug and alcohol. As a result of this it is important that practitioners have up to date information, confidence and competence to deal with all of these issues and to liaise effectively, where appropriately, with other service systems.
[ top ]
Theme 2: Program Design
- How can we build flexible service models with improved service pathways that are consistent with the FSP principles and operational framework?
- How can we ensure the service system is able to adequately support and engage both universal and targeted client groups in a region?
Through networks such as FRSP forums and networks and The SA Family Pathways networks, services in SA have been partially successful in negotiating effective pathways for clients. One of the most successful endeavours over the past 18 months has been for FRSP services to meet to track what FRSP services existed where so that we could map our combined regional service delivery.
This is happening quite effectively, at times, in SA and will hopefully continue to grow in consistency and detail to include not only what services are provided but with what intervention models and how? Again, a set of common service standards would be useful in facilitating this.
[ top ]
Theme 3: Service Delivery and Innovation
- Can we improve service delivery so that clients requiring services in any of the core FSP streams can enter through any FSP service (ie a 'no wrong door' approach)?
- How can we link with other community services (eg FaHCSIA and other Commonwealth programs, state /territory services such as child protection services and mental health)?
- Should we have a set of standards for staff delivering any FSP service?
- What quality service standards do you think the FSP should have and are there existing standards that might apply?
- In what circumstances would providers benefit from sharing information/data/resources (including offices, administrative processes, workers, products) and how could this be facilitated?
As mentioned in theme 1 clients tell us that they often receive mixed messages from different services. Considering this we believe it is imperative that a set of standards be delivered that provide unison for service providers, particularly around issues such as family violence and child protection. Details of these standards could be an integral part of position description for all FSP workers so that we could ensure that every professional entering our services have basic shared understandings of child protection and the protection of women and children.
The National Framework for Protecting Australia's Children 2009-2020 and The National Councils Plan For Australia to reduce Violence against Women and Children
are the two obvious documents that could lead to our sector operating under universal standards in regard to these issues.
Shared information, updates on the latest developments in good practice around working with issues concerning child protection and family violence would certainly be an effective way of ensuring FSP services are on the same page.
[ top ]
Theme 4: Needs and Location
- What factors should be taken into account in determining the range of FSP services required for a region or community?
- What is the best way to specify service catchments/service delivery areas? For example: In delivering services should your delivery area be defined by statistical sub-divisions, local government regions, postcodes or by other means?
One of the major issues to consider in location of service is accessibility and transport route. Statistical sub-divisions is a useful starting point but this information needs to then be mapped against factors that affect accessibility including transport and income.
[ top ]
Theme 5: Selection and Retention of Providers
- How should a balance be achieved between giving providers funding security, managing performance and ensuring services are located in areas of need?
- How should good performance in the FSP be identified?
- How should outcomes in the FSP be measured?
- What systems and processes could we use to support this?
The question of how to evaluate good practice has obviously been a difficult one to answer in FRSP services for quite some time. Our experience has been that actual client numbers have been prioritised as the main measurement of the overall success of a service. While agreeing that this is an important factor, quantity of clients reached can sometimes be prioritised over quality of work being done. It is often the case that, for our FRSP services, total client sessions is a more effective way of measuring success. A focus of actual client sessions takes away from an emphasis on meeting with large amounts of clients for only a short amount of time.
In truth, we believe, when judging the success of our services that a holistic picture concerning client numbers, client sessions and evaluation results is needed to truly judge the overall merit of that service
[ top ]
Theme 6: Funding
- What are the key features that providers consider essential in building a rational and transparent system for distributing available resources?
The idea of tailored funding packages is one that our FRSP services would certainly support. For example, UnitingCare Wesley Adelaide has facilitated a FRSC service for the past three years and has consistently met and exceeded targets. This has not been the case with FRSC services in all states and territories. There are no doubt many different reasons for this but the fact remains if services are tailored to particular regions or states there is more opportunity for services to remain in areas where they are providing the most good for clients.