Child Safety in the context of the Commission

Brisbane 6 May 2011

David Glasgow – Commissioner

Tammy Sovenyhazi - Registrar

Family Responsibilities Commission

1

Based on the ‘Hand Out to Hand Up’ Report (Noel Pearson, May 2007)

Agenda for Reform• Unacceptable indicators for Indigenous compared with non-indigenous Australians

• STI’s: Indigenous children are more than twice as likely to contract an STI associated with child sexual abuse than non-Indigenous children

• Corrosive effect of passive welfare – a range of Government policies beginning in 1970s and 1980s has displaced responsibility from Indigenous people.

• General need for fundamental rethinking of community functioning and service provision

Indicator Indigenous Australians compared with non

Indigenous Australians

Infant mortality Infant mortality rates 2-3 times higher -

Birth weight Low to extremely low birth weight twice as likely

School Attendance School attendance in some areas of Cape York eg

Aurukun averages 46 % as at term 1 2008

Alcohol sales Per capita consumption in Cape York communities is

around 4 to 4.5 times the national average

Children on

protection orders

Indigenous children are almost 7.5 times as likely

to be subject to a protective order

What is Cape York Welfare Reform?

The CYWR is a series of integrated initiatives that tests new approaches to:

• Linking access to welfare payments conditional on obligations regarding behaviour• Increasing individual responsibility and active participation within the community and real

economy, and• Achieving integrated service delivery and reform that removes disincentives which cause

dependency cycles and achieves better outcomes

Outcomes of the trial are expected to be:

1. Rebuilding positive social norms

2. Restoring local Indigenous authority

3. Supporting community and individual engagement in the ‘real economy’

4. Moving individuals and families from welfare housing to home ownership.

5. Normalising Government responsibility and involvement

Partners

• Individuals and Families• Local Leadership: Councils (Aurukun and Hopevale)

and Community Leaders (Coen and Mossman Gorge)• Queensland Government • Australian Government• Cape York Institute for Policy and Leadership• Family Responsibilities Commission (FRC)• Service Providers –

Non-Government/Regional/Contracted organisations

New service delivery models• Wellbeing Centres established in all four trial

communities - jointly funded between AG and QG

• Family Income Management Services in all four communities – funded by the AG

• School Attendance Case Managers in all four communities – funded by the AG

• Parenting Programs establishment in all four communities

The four CYWR Communities

Aurukun

Hope Vale

Mossman Gorge

Coen

The Cape York Welfare Reform Communities are:

AurukunAurukun is on the western coast of Cape York and is approximately 900 kls northwest of Cairns and about 200 klms south of Weipa. Estimated resident population of 1209 people at 30 June 2009.

CoenThe township of Coen is about halfway between Cairns and the tip of Cape York. It is not a discrete Aboriginal community and is part of Cook Shire. Estimated resident population of 272 people at 30 June 2009.

Hope ValeHope Vale is situated on the Cape York Peninsula and is 46 kmls northwest of Cooktown. Estimated resident population of 832 people at 30 June 2009.

Mossman GorgeMossman Gorge is a small Aboriginal community 75 klms north of Cairns, 4 kls from Mossman. It is not a discrete Aboriginal community and is part of the Cairns Regional Council area. Estimated resident population of 147 people at 30 June 2009.

Family Responsibilities Commission (FRC)

• Family Responsibilities Commission Act 2008 passed in the Queensland Parliament on 13 March 2008

• The FRC is an Independent Statutory Authority which commenced operation on 1 July 2008

• FRC provides an “official” structure within the community where norms around appropriate and inappropriate behaviour can be negotiated and communicated

• FRC jurisdiction applies to people (Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal): who are welfare recipients or CDEP participants; and who reside (or resided at relevant times) in trial communities

Objectives of the FRC

1. To support the restoration of socially responsible standards of behaviour and local authority in welfare reform communities

2. To help people in welfare reform community areas to resume primary responsibility for the wellbeing of their community and the individuals and families of the community

Who makes up the FRC?

Commissioners:• Commissioner David Glasgow, former Magistrate• Local Commissioners – 18 Elders or Respected People from the

four communities appointed by the Governor in Council

Cairns Registry Office:• Tammy Sovenyhazi - Registrar• Alison Kollmorgen – Executive Officer• Sharon Newcomb – Principal Case Manager• 15 Administrative staff

Local Registry Office based in each community:Aurukun, Coen, Hope Vale and Mossman Gorge• Local Coordinator (resident in each community)

Priorities of the FRC• The focus of the FRC is primarily on early intervention

and the wellbeing of children. Our priorities are: School Attendance and Child Safety Notifications

• Raising local authority in each community - already seeing some positive impacts with Local Commissioners regularly called upon by government agencies and community members to provide guidance and advice

• Assisting community members subject to the FRC to make decisions to change their lives and assist them through the processes

Decide Conference GO/NO GO

Decide Conference GO/NO GO

Hold Conference

Hold Conference

Outcome: Agreement

or Order

Outcome: Agreement

or Order

Ag

en

cie

sF

RC

Sta

ff

1. INTAKE 3. CONFERENCE2. ASSESSMENT 4.DECISION 5. COMPLIANCE

How the FRC worksF

RC

Co

mm

iss

ion

er/

Lo

ca

l C

om

mis

sio

ne

rs

case plancase plan

Confirm welfarerecipient

and resident

Referral noticesReferral notices

Issue and serve notice to attendIssue and serve notice to attend

Monitor

Show cause

Gather more information (eg

What CS are doing?

Gather more information (eg

What CS are doing?

Impact on Notifying Agencies, Service providers and other organisations that have contact with our clients

6 & 9 Month CIM

Review

Case Plan Review

The people who make it happen…

Commissioners

Commissioners

Edgar Kerindun

AurukunCommissioner

Doris Poonkamelya & family

AurukunCommissioner

Brian Cobus

Hope ValeCommissioner

Commissioners & Friends

Intake PhaseAgency Notifications:

The Act places an obligation on relevant agencies to submit approved agency notifications to the FRC about:

• School attendance - 3 full or part days within a school term• Child Safety Notifications - Child Safety Concern Reports

and Finalised Child Safety Investigations• Tenancy Breaches• Convictions in the Magistrates Court

Agency Notifications received

To 31 December 2010 the FRC received a total of 9067 agency notifications:

Client Notifications 1 July 08 to 31 Dec 10 Within Jurisdiction 6336 School Attendance 2540 Child Safety 822 Magistrate Court 2844 Housing Tenancy 130

Not Within Jurisdiction 2731 School Attendance 256 Child Safety 122 Magistrate Court 2321 Housing Tenancy 32 Total Notifications 9067

Assessment Phase

• Information Officers determine jurisdiction - who are welfare recipients (or CDEP participants) and reside in the relevant community

• Local Commissioners determine which matters are brought to conference at fortnightly meetings

• Conference timetable set

• Local Coordinators prepare and serve the client with ‘Notice to Attend Conference’ and other conference notices

• Additional information is sought e.g. Domestic Violence Orders, Probation Orders, Child Safety Case Plans, if appropriate

• Files prepared in Cairns Registry by administration staff

Conference Rules

• Content of conference is privileged and cannot be used in a court as evidence and rules of evidence do not apply

• If English is not the clients first language arrangements must be made to ensure the client can understand and actively participate in the conference

• Conferences are not audio-recorded

• No legal representation – unless considered appropriate in the interests of justice

• Client may have support persons attend with them

• Others may be invited or directed to attend at discretion of Commissioner’s if deemed they could assist with reaching an outcome

• If individual fails to appear the first conference, the conference is rescheduled to another time

• Decisions to be unanimous if possible – otherwise by majority (dissenting position must be recorded)

Conference Phase• Conferences are very informal (e.g. all attendees sitting around a

table), chaired by a Local Commissioner

• Matters raised in the agency notifications are discussed as well as any other matters affecting the individual and their family

• In Aurukun conferences conducted in Wik-Mungkan

• Conferences are conducted to assist clients in identifying ways to make changes to their lives

• Most conferences result in clients entering into an agreement to attend support services such as Wellbeing Centre’s, FIM, ACM or other services available

Conference Outcomes• To take no further action in relation to the notice

• Reprimand the person

• Recommend that the person attend an appropriate community support service

• Enter into a Family Responsibilities Agreement

• Direct the person to attend an appropriate community support service under a case plan for not more than 1 year

• Give the Centrelink secretary a notice requiring that the person be subject to income management for at least 3 months but not more than 1 year at a rate of 60% or 75%

Conferences

Conferences

Conference Outcomes cont’d2829 Conferences were held for the period 1 July 2008 to 31 December 2010

Qtr 1

Qtr 2

Qtr 3

Qtr 4

Qtr 5

Qtr 6

Qtr 7

Qtr 8

Qtr 9

Qtr 10 Total

Aurukun 37 72 154 187 172 232 163 288 192 399 1896

Coen 13 10 11 21 25 29 34 19 18 24 204

Hope Vale 28 89 105 104 141 102 110 97 98 126 1000

Mossman Gorge 19 30 22 49 28 44 26 32 28 60 338

97 201 292 361 366 407 333 436 336 609 3438

Client Service ReferralsAll Communities

Qtr 1

Qtr 2

Qtr 3

Qtr 4

Qtr 5

Qtr 6

Qtr 7

Qtr8

Qtr 9

Qtr 10 Total

FIM 15 38 61 27 49 41 22 21 10 29 313

WBC 27 51 132 66 87 80 93 25 21 31 613

ACM 7 6 24 55 22 22 10 5 1 5 157

Parenting Program 8 3 4 1 2 7 2 4 5 18 54

EVFP 0 1 1 0 1 0 35 23 31 39 131

AFP 5 5

Other 17 30 23 19 14 5 8 5 8 2 131

74 129 245 168 175 155 170 83 76 129 1404

Footnote: From Quarter 1 to Quarter 8 the EVFP figures were reported in the ‘Other’ category for the Quarterly and Annual Reports.

AFP Referrals commenced in Quarter 10.

Client Subject to Conditional Income Management (CIM)

Qtr1

Qtr 2

Qtr 3

Qtr 4

Qtr5

Qtr 6

Qtr 7

Qtr 8

Qtr 9

Qtr10 Total

Aurukun 0 6 10 19 18 37 21 46 27 59 243

Coen 1 0 0 0 1 11 10 2 2 4 31

Hope Vale 0 7 18 8 13 21 13 15 15 17 127

Mossman Gorge 1 11 4 4 9 7 3 5 5 8 57

2 24 32 31 41 76 47 68 49 88 458

Case Management Phase• The FRC has an obligation under the act to monitor the progress of clients under a

case plan

• Notice of Decision and Case Plan is served on client if they failed to attend conference

• Service Providers are provided with a copy of the Agreement/Decision and Case Plan

• Service providers are required to submit a monthly progress report (during the life of the case plan) to the FRC which provides such information as:• Has client attended service?• Is the client actively participating in the program?• Is the client making progress in positively changing their behaviour?

• If a client does not comply, show cause proceedings may be commenced.

Case Management cont’dCIM Review:• Conditional Income Management orders are reviewed at the 6 and 9 month

mark to ascertain how the client is progressing.• Clients are able to apply for their CIM order to be varied or revoked if they

can provide evidence of attendance at community support services.

Show Cause Proceedings:• Where a client has not complied with their case plan• Client is served with a Show Cause Hearing notice giving 14 days notice.• When served with the notice the client is advised that if they commence

complying with the case plan the Commissioners will take this into account at the hearing.

• Commissioners may order that the client be subject to Conditional Income Management, reinforce the case plan or revoke the case plan and order a new case plan with different or additional conditions.

Student Attendance Rate

2008 2009 2010

School/Community

Term1%

Term2%

Term 3%

Term 4%

Term1%

Term2%

Term 3%

Term 4%

Term1%

Term2%

Term 3%

Term 4%

Aurukun 46.1 37.9 44.5 43.5 56.1 63.2 66.0 61.6 65.9 57.7 54.1 64.8

Coen 91.3 96.8 87.4 94.1 95.3 93.6 92.9 90.4 94.9 92.2 89.0 87.6

Hope Vale 80.6 87.6 83.3 81.5 88.2 86.9 76.6 84.1 87.3 83.5 80.8 80.6

Mossman Gorge N/A 60.9 75.8 78.7 80.1 81.6 78.0 79.5 84.2 79.1 82.3 77.7

School Attendance statistics for term 1, 2010 have been provided by the Department of Education and Training.

Information Sharing Protocols• The Information Sharing Protocols set out the circumstances in

which, and the means by which, information may be exchanged between the FRC and prescribed entities and other relevant agencies.

• The purpose of the information sharing provisions of the FRC Act is to remove potential barriers to the exchange of relevant information in order to effectively support the work of the FRC, while ensuring the confidentiality owed to individuals and prescribed entities is respected.

Statutory Obligations

• Written report to Family Responsibilities Board at the end of each quarter Quarterly Report 1 & 2 (combined), 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 now

published Quarterly Report 10 (yet to be tabled in the Queensland

Parliament)

• Annual Report to the Minister for Local Government, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships

• Social Development Parliamentary Committee• Public Service office, therefore all obligations as for any

state government department must be met

Amendments to Act - 2010

• Elimination of compulsory Case Plans

• Reduction for Show Cause period from 28 days to 14 days

• Three Local Commissioners may now sit (with some restrictions)

ChallengesImplementation and On-going:

• Office and staff accommodation in each community• Information Sharing between FRC and relevant agencies• Creation of an MoU with CSS to provide access• Meeting Statutory obligations in such a small organisation• Intensity of Sittings Schedule• Community Support Services not functioning effectively (or not at

all) at the time of our commencement• Strengthening Community acceptance• Consultation with community members• Developing consultation between CSS and Commissioners, prior to

the removal of children

Future Direction

• On-going internal review of administrative processes• Possible extension of the life of the Commission• Training of Local Commissioners – JP (Qualified and Magistrates

Court), mediation, advocacy, assertiveness, computer literacy• Breaking down barriers to sharing of information between FRC and

agencies• Outcomes focus on services delivered to FRC clients• Focusing on utilizing our Local Commissioners as drivers within the

community to increase individual and community responsibilities• Ensuring the impetus of welfare reform continues at the end of the

Commission’s term (1 January 2012)

Reference MaterialFamily Responsibilities Commission:

www.frcq.org.au

Family Responsibilities Commission Act 2008:www.legislation.qld.gov.au

Cape York Institute for Policy and Leadership:• Cape York Partnerships:

www.capeyorkpartnerships.com

Queensland Government:• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships, Department of Communities:

www.atsip.com.au

Australian Government:• Department of Families, Housing, Community Service and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA)

www.fahcsia.gov.au

Australian Institute of Family Studies, National Child Protection Clearinghousewww.aifs.gov.au