Ex-Prisoners, SAAP, Housing and Homelessness in Australia
Methodology
Interviews with staff of SAAP funded agencies
As SAAP agencies are often stretched in terms of resources, and to encourage voluntary participation in the research project, an email about the project was distributed by the Australian Federation of Homelessness Organisations to its member organisations. The email provided a brief outline of the project and asked any agencies who wished to be involved to contact the researchers at the Australian Institute of Criminology by a specified date. Through this call for participation, and through word of mouth between agencies, organisations in five states expressed interest in being involved. Upon contacting the AIC, agencies were advised in further detail about the aims of the research project. In particular, agencies were advised that involvement on their part would require
- (a) a willingness by their staff members to be interviewed by an AIC researcher in person at their site, and
- (b) a willingness and the capacity for their agency to organise some of their ex-prisoner clients to be interviewed anonymously on site by an AIC researcher.
Following discussions with the AIC a number of organisations were not able to be involved, either because they did not provide services to the ex-prisoner target group or because resource constraints prevented their involvement.
After discussions and negotiations with agencies who were able to participate, six agencies in five states became actively involved in this research project. Interviews with both staff and ex-prisoner clients were conducted in the agencies' offices during November and December 2003. A profile of the agencies participating is at Appendix C.
Each of the six participating agencies facilitated interviews with members of its client group. Qualitative interviews were also conducted with staff of five six of these agencies. A total of 18 staff members were interviewed. A community corrections officer also actively participated in interviews in one location.
The instrument used to conduct qualitative interviews with staff is at Appendix D
[ top ]
Interviews with ex-prisoner clients
Clients were approached by SAAP agency staff, advised of the research project and asked if they were willing to be interviewed. For those clients who agreed to be participate, SAAP agency staff in most instances arranged a time with clients to be at the interview location. The AIC researcher was advised by the SAAP agency staff of the interviews, times and locations, but no names were provided to the AIC researcher.
Qualitative interviews were conducted with 41 ex-prisoner clients in five states during November and December 2003. Clients were not specifically asked about their Indigenous status, however a small number referred to themselves as Indigenous during the course of the interviews. It is estimated that five of the clients interviewed were Indigenous. Thirty-nine of these interviews were conducted face-to-face while two were conducted by telephone. Face-to-face interviews were conducted either in office space provided by agencies within their business offices, or in their accommodation properties. On average, each interview took between 30 and 45 minutes to complete.
Of the 41 clients interviewed, nine were female and 32 were male. A male AIC staff member interviewed all male clients. In one location, where the agency operates both men's and women's support services, prior arrangements had been made to have a female AIC staff member visit and interview all female clients. This approach was supported by the agency as many of the female clients had experienced domestic violence and it was felt by the agency and the AIC that being interviewed by another female was highly appropriate.
The male interviewer conducted three interviews with female clients in other locations. Two of these clients had been identified and referred by their support workers (one of whom is was male) and agreed to be interviewed, fully understanding that a male would interview them. In the other case, the female client approached the male interviewer directly and explicitly agreed to be interviewed by him.
The instrument used to conduct qualitative interviews with ex-prisoner clients is at Appendix E.
[ top ]
Use of vouchers
In designing the research methodology a decision was taken by the research team that all clients agreeing to be interviewed would be given compensation, in the form of a $20 food voucher redeemable at a fast food restaurant, at the end of the interview. Noting that most interviews would take around 30 to 45 minutes, it was felt this would compensate clients for the time they had given up and any possible expense they may have incurred in travelling to an interview site. The voucher was discussed with each of the participating agencies and all agencies supported the voucher as being an appropriate compensation to clients.
The AIC Ethics Committee gave approval for a methodology that included the provision of McDonald's restaurant vouchers.
In practice a range of vouchers from different suppliers was used during the course of the interviews. For the interviews conducted in Brisbane, arrangements were made with the Retail Marketing section of McDonald's Australia's Queensland office to purchase vouchers that the interviewer collected on his way from the airport to the homeless shelter. Organising these vouchers took a degree of coordination as they could only be obtained through the Queensland head office and could only be used in a number of company-owned restaurants within the Brisbane Central Business District (CBD). The vouchers could not be used in franchised McDonald's restaurants in the CBD or any restaurants outside the CBD. As each voucher could only be used on one occasion and could not, for accounting reasons, be used in the manner of a debit card, a quantity of $5 vouchers were purchased and four of these were given to each client who was interviewed.
Following significant difficulties in obtaining McDonalds and other fast food vouchers in other states, no further attempts were made to obtain McDonalds or other fast food restaurant vouchers.
For interviews in other locations, the interviewer purchased $20 vouchers from Big W/Woolworth's, Target and Kmart stores. The purchase of vouchers from a range of different store chains primarily reflected a conscious decision to allow clients to receive vouchers from a store that was reasonably accessible to them. This was particularly important in one city, where the supported accommodation was in a number of geographically dispersed areas, and for the vast majority of clients in each location who did not have private transport.
[ top ]
The research team encountered one issue with respect to the Big W/Woolworth's vouchers, which could be redeemed at any store in the Woolworth's family, including its liquor outlets. The research team was concerned that some clients with alcohol problems could use the vouchers inappropriately. This was discussed with a number of agencies. One agency had considered this problem in the past and had a 'no alcohol' stamp, which it used on these vouchers. Another agency had also considered the problem and recognised that some of its clients used alcohol as a coping mechanism. This agency had no concerns about its clients purchasing alcohol with the vouchers if it would help them cope with the many problems these clients faced in their daily lives. The research team concluded that the main issue was that the clients were adults and entitled to make their own decisions about the
purchase of any items legally available to them. It was felt to be inappropriate to provide clients with a voucher and then dictate to them what they could and could not use it for.
It is interesting to note that the agency which used the 'no alcohol' stamp nonetheless saw any discount store or supermarket vouchers as preferable to fast food vouchers, which the agency felt would have undermined their efforts to teach their clients good nutrition and financial management practices.
The interviewers felt, and this view was strongly supported by the staff of each agency it was discussed with, that the use of some kind of voucher or similar compensation was essential to the success of this research project. While it is not possible to say with certainty, the primary interviewer felt that only around one third of the 41 interviews would have been obtained if compensation was not provided. Certainly some clients took part without knowing until after the interview they would be receiving a voucher. Some other clients remarked that they just wanted to help and would have happily done the interview anyway. At the same time it was apparent that a considerable number of clients would not have made themselves available if they did not receive compensation for it. Agency staff also commented that the vouchers were a great incentive to participation and it was much easier for them to facilitate the interviews once clients became aware that compensation was being offered.
[ top ]
Implications from use of vouchers
In research of this kind involving ex-prisoners, any ethical issues that arise from the offering of compensation must be balanced with a range of other considerations. It needs to be recognised that most ex-prisoners have been asked to talk about themselves, their actions and their experiences on numerous occasions. Through the legal process, through case management and programs conducted in prison and through the interactions with support services, ex-prisoners may have been repeatedly asked about these aspects of their lives. Many may be tired of feeling they are being scrutinised, answering questions and talking about themselves. Many may simply want to leave their offences and imprisonment behind them and focus on their future. Through their experiences many ex-prisoners are wary of strangers and anyone they perceive as an authority figure and may be suspicious of a researcher's motives.
Prisoners and ex-prisoners are the focus of a significant amount of research and some potential interview subjects may have already been interviewed by researchers, perhaps recently. During the current research, the interviewer encountered a number of clients who had recently been interviewed for research on other components of the SAAP evaluation. Ex-prisoners who have already recently given up their time for research may be reluctant to do so again without compensation.
In the present case the research team felt the provision of compensation, in the form of gift vouchers, was an integral part of securing the quantity and variety of interviews obtained for this research. The cost of the vouchers must also be balanced against the significant potential benefits to be gained from the information obtained during these interviews.
[ top ]
Importance of anonymity
Given the possible wariness and suspicion of ex-prisoners it was also critical that the interviewers assured the clients of the confidentiality and anonymity of the information they gave. Of particular importance was the reassurances given before the interview that the client would not be asked about their offences or their experiences in prison. Clients were also assured they were not expected to talk about anything they found uncomfortable and could choose not to answer any question. It was apparent that these assurances were very important to some clients, who would likely not have participated if they were asked about aspects of their offending or imprisonment history. The involvement of staff in giving clients these same assurances was also critical to securing their participation.
Although clients were not asked anything specifically about their offences, and were assured they did not have to speak about them, many clients voluntarily spoke of their offending. No client spoke in detail about any offences, but a number talked about their drug use histories, or about having stolen to get money for illicit drugs, food or accommodation. A small number of clients made reference to having committed violent offences but did not discuss these in detail.
[ top ]