TY - RPRT AU - Spinney, Angela AU - Habibis, Daphne AU - McNelis, Sean CY - Melbourne DO - doi:10.18408/ahuri-5109301 L1 - internal-pdf://1918956454/AHURI_Final_Report_No272_Safe and sound How fu.pdf M1 - 51093 M3 - FR N1 - What the research did: This research investigates the impact of funding sources on the outcomes of services for Indigenous Australians. A range of case study services—mainstream, Indigenous-specific, homelessness specific and key groups such as youth and people experiencing domestic and family violence—were examined, and key informant focus groups were conducted. Research was undertaken in Northern Territory, Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. Summary of key findings: • No Federal or state government program specifically targets supporting homeless Indigenous people or those at risk of experiencing homelessness, despite over-representation in the homeless population (2.5% of population: 9% of homelessness population, AIHW 2011). • Most core funding for homelessness services comes from governments (for example through the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness). Two case studies demonstrating this funding dominance, in a structurally different way, include: o The Northern Territory Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation which receives 85% of its funding from Commonwealth, territory and local government with all of its services for homeless people funded through mainstream programs. The Corporation provides support to ‘long grass dwellers’, runs the Night Patrol program and the financially unsustainable Return to Country program which is now in jeopardy. o Weave Youth and Community Services in NSW which supports homelessness Indigenous youth. While 75% of its funding is through government, around a quarter of funds come from corporate sponsorship and with a fundraising manager on board the aim is to increase this to 50% of revenue. Weave has been able to consolidate and expand its services to provide additional support [hence potentially achieving better outcomes]. • A lack of policy coordination and funding uncertainty (eg quantum of funds and length of agreements) has a major impact on service provision and outcomes for Indigenous people. Organisations reported operational inefficiencies, an inability to innovate, service cuts and problems in attracting and sustaining staff. • Almost all of the organisations represented in the focus groups and case studies received, albeit relatively small, additional types of funding or support, such as donations of goods, philanthropic grants and cash donations from community members and fundraising activities. • While funding uncertainty affects service delivery, most organisations were cautious to pursue further diversification of funding citing potential negative consequences on service provision and outcomes. • Indigenous Australians who are homeless or at risk of homelessness may not be receiving support that is best suited to them or is culturally appropriate [this is likely to affect optimum outcomes]. In your opinion, is it a good piece of research that warrants more than just the normal communication from us? This research focusses in on the Indigenous perspective. It is part of an Inquiry into the funding of homelessness services in Australia and utilises data collected in a survey conducted as part of the first research project (Flatau). There is some cross over in reporting from the survey hence this summary has focussed on the original fieldwork. And finally, tell us if you think there are any good stats, images, maps etc. in the report that we could draw on to prepare an infographic or the like: Chapter 3 presents the context of the Survey conducted in Flatau’s project. There were 27 organisations providing services to Indigenous people included in the survey. This chapter presents the data in table format. Flatau’s report has an Indigenous chapter presenting some of the same information graphically. Due to the cross over (and intellectual IP) it might be better to leave any reporting from the survey until the Final Inquiry Report. The case studies and focus groups do not lend themselves to visual reporting. NV - Swinburne PB - Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Limited PY - 2016 RP - What the research did: This research investigates the impact of funding sources on the outcomes of services for Indigenous Australians. A range of case study services—mainstream, Indigenous-specific, homelessness specific and key groups such as youth and people experiencing domestic and family violence—were examined, and key informant focus groups were conducted. Research was undertaken in Northern Territory, Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. Summary of key findings: • No Federal or state government program specifically targets supporting homeless Indigenous people or those at risk of experiencing homelessness, despite over-representation in the homeless population (2.5% of population: 9% of homelessness population, AIHW 2011). • Most core funding for homelessness services comes from governments (for example through the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness). Two case studies demonstrating this funding dominance, in a structurally different way, include: o The Northern Territory Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation which receives 85% of its funding from Commonwealth, territory and local government with all of its services for homeless people funded through mainstream programs. The Corporation provides support to ‘long grass dwellers’, runs the Night Patrol program and the financially unsustainable Return to Country program which is now in jeopardy. o Weave Youth and Community Services in NSW which supports homelessness Indigenous youth. While 75% of its funding is through government, around a quarter of funds come from corporate sponsorship and with a fundraising manager on board the aim is to increase this to 50% of revenue. Weave has been able to consolidate and expand its services to provide additional support [hence potentially achieving better outcomes]. • A lack of policy coordination and funding uncertainty (eg quantum of funds and length of agreements) has a major impact on service provision and outcomes for Indigenous people. Organisations reported operational inefficiencies, an inability to innovate, service cuts and problems in attracting and sustaining staff. • Almost all of the organisations represented in the focus groups and case studies received, albeit relatively small, additional types of funding or support, such as donations of goods, philanthropic grants and cash donations from community members and fundraising activities. • While funding uncertainty affects service delivery, most organisations were cautious to pursue further diversification of funding citing potential negative consequences on service provision and outcomes. • Indigenous Australians who are homeless or at risk of homelessness may not be receiving support that is best suited to them or is culturally appropriate [this is likely to affect optimum outcomes]. In your opinion, is it a good piece of research that warrants more than just the normal communication from us? This research focusses in on the Indigenous perspective. It is part of an Inquiry into the funding of homelessness services in Australia and utilises data collected in a survey conducted as part of the first research project (Flatau). There is some cross over in reporting from the survey hence this summary has focussed on the original fieldwork. And finally, tell us if you think there are any good stats, images, maps etc. in the report that we could draw on to prepare an infographic or the like: Chapter 3 presents the context of the Survey conducted in Flatau’s project. There were 27 organisations providing services to Indigenous people included in the survey. This chapter presents the data in table format. Flatau’s report has an Indigenous chapter presenting some of the same information graphically. Due to the cross over (and intellectual IP) it might be better to leave any reporting from the survey until the Final Inquiry Report. The case studies and focus groups do not lend themselves to visual reporting. ST - Safe and sound? How funding mix affects homelessness support for Indigenous Australians T2 - AHURI Final Report No. 272 TI - Safe and sound? How funding mix affects homelessness support for Indigenous Australians UR - http://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/272 ID - 774 ER -