nsw government employment and economic development ... · nsw regional business growth plans 93!...

NSW Government Employment and Economic Development Programs for Aboriginal People Review of programs and broader considerations December 2011

Report to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, The Hon. Victor Dominello, MP

R E V I E W O F N S W G O V E R N M E N T A B O R I G I N A L E M P L O Y M E N T & E C O N O M I C D E V E L O P M E N T P R O G R A M S

The Allen Consulting Group ii

Allen Consulting Group Pty Ltd

ACN 007 061 930, ABN 52 007 061 930

Melbourne

Level 9, 60 Collins St Melbourne VIC 3000 Telephone: (61-3) 8650 6000 Facsimile: (61-3) 9654 6363

Sydney

Level 1, 50 Pitt St Sydney NSW 2000 Telephone: (61-2) 8272 5100 Facsimile: (61-2) 9247 2455

Canberra

Empire Chambers, Level 2, 1-13 University Ave Canberra ACT 2600 GPO Box 418, Canberra ACT 2601 Telephone: (61-2) 6204 6500 Facsimile: (61-2) 6230 0149

Online

Email: [email protected] Website: www.allenconsult.com.au

Suggested citation: Allen Consulting Group 2011, NSW Government Employment and Economic Development Programs for Aboriginal People — Review of programs and broader considerations, Report to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, The Hon. Victor Dominello, MP, Sydney, October 2011.

Disclaimer: While the Allen Consulting Group endeavours to provide reliable analysis and believes the material it presents is accurate, it will not be liable for any claim by any party acting on such information. © Allen Consulting Group 2011


The Allen Consulting Group iii

Contents

List of acronyms and abbreviations v Executive summary vi

Chapter 1 Why getting Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives right is so important 8

1.1 Economic participation of Aboriginal people in NSW 8 1.2 This report 11

Chapter 2 Review of individual programs 15

2.1 Overview 15 2.2 Job Compacts 20 2.3 Aboriginal Jobs Together 23 2.4 Aboriginal Participation in Construction (APIC) Guidelines 27 2.5 Aboriginal Participation in Procurement (APIP) Guidelines 30 2.6 Initiatives for the Local Government Sector 32 2.7 Aboriginal Communities Development Program (ACDP) 34 2.8 Economic Development Officer (EDO) Network 38 2.9 Aboriginal Business Development Program (ABDP) 42 2.10 Making It Our Business (MIOB) 50 2.11 Aboriginal Training Coordinators 54 2.12 The Way Ahead for Aboriginal People 55 2.13 New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP) 59 2.14 Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officer (AEDO) Program 61 2.15 Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program (EDAEP) 63

Chapter 3 Collective review of impact, strengths, impediments and gaps 68

3.1 Describing the program landscape 68 3.2 Assessing the suite of initiatives 70 3.3 Conclusions and recommendations for making improvements at the

program level 75


The Allen Consulting Group iv

Chapter 4 Broader considerations 78

4.1 Interaction between NSW and Commonwealth initiatives 78 4.2 Adopting a life course approach 80 4.3 Leveraging growth industries and regions 85 4.4 Strengthening partnerships with the private sector 88 4.5 Developing a master plan for enhancing economic participation of

Aboriginal people in NSW 90

Appendix A NSW Regional Business Growth Plans 93

References 97


The Allen Consulting Group v

List of acronyms and abbreviations

AANSW Department of Aboriginal Affairs NSW

AbSec Aboriginal Child, Family and Community Care State Secretariat

ACDP Aboriginal Communities Development Program

ABC Aboriginal Building Companies

ABDP Aboriginal Business Development Program

ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics

AEDO Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officer

AIMC Aboriginal Minority Supplier Council

APIC Aboriginal Participation in Construction

APIP Aboriginal Participation in Procurement

ATC Aboriginal Training Coordinator

BVET NSW Board of Vocational Education and Training

CDEP Community Development Employment Project

COAG Council of Australian Governments

DEC NSW Department of Education and Communities

DEEWR Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)

DTIRIS Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services NSW

EDAEP Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program

EDO Economic Development Officer

ESBRD Enterprise, Small Business and Regional Development (unit within DTIRIS)

FaHCSIA Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (Commonwealth)

MIOB Making It Our Business

NAEP New South Wales Aboriginal Employment Program

NCAP New Careers for Aboriginal People

NDS National Disability Services

NGO Non-Government Organisation

NIRA National Indigenous Reform Agreement

NPA IEP National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation

STS State Training Services (NSW Department of Education and Communities)


The Allen Consulting Group vi

Executive summary

Economic participation through sustainable employment and business ownership is linked to financial security and prosperity, which in turn bring substantial ancillary social and economic benefits for the individual, their families and communities. There remain high levels of Aboriginal disadvantage in New South Wales (NSW), as in the rest of Australia; this this is reflected, inter alia, in high unemployment rates and low percentages of Aboriginal people owning their own business compared to non-Aboriginal people.

There is no lack of programs or funding initiatives to improve Aboriginal economic participation. Indeed, a large number of education, employment and economic development programs are delivered or available in NSW, some jointly funded by the NSW and Commonwealth Governments. However, despite all these efforts and investments, no significant progress has been made in closing the gap in economic outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people (Commonwealth of Australia 2011).

The Allen Consulting Group was commissioned by Aboriginal Affairs NSW to review a number of NSW Government Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives to determine their effectiveness in delivering the desired outcomes. While limited availability of data precluded a conclusive determination of these initiatives’ overall contribution to improving economic outcomes for Aboriginal people, and whether the programs provide good value for money, the picture that does emerge calls for fundamental changes to the way things are currently done.

There are programs that have been effective in creating employment and business opportunities for Aboriginal people, but it has often been difficult to find suitable candidates or to sustain employment in these positions over time. Indeed, some programs — having been successful at the outset — were unable to sustain their impact past the lapsing of initial government funding.

Overall, the development of Aboriginal economic development and employment programs across NSW appears to be opportunistic and un-coordinated. There is no clear and consistent overarching strategic framework that would link individual initiatives to clearly communicated needs of Aboriginal people, obvious gaps in service delivery, or overarching Commonwealth or state policy frameworks. Resulting overlaps and duplication in service provision, inefficient governance and administrative structures, and unclear arrangements for accountability and responsibility remain largely unaddressed. The provision of sustained support through linking of education, employment and mentoring programs is not yet a reality. Integration and coordination between NSW and Commonwealth programs and the services they deliver is limited at best and in some cases non-existent.

In response to the above, the report formulates a number of recommendations at both the program and strategic levels.


The Allen Consulting Group vii

Recommended improvements at program level include:

• Consolidation of functional duplication — Consolidating initiatives with similar objectives and services is essential to achieve an efficient allocation of limited financial and human resources, ensure effective service delivery, and avoid confusion among service recipients;

• Streamlining of administrative arrangements — Streamlining administrative arrangements in terms of departmental responsibility for programs will contribute to clearer lines of accountability, responsibility and communication, and eventually result in improved resource efficiency; and

• Strengthening of monitoring and evaluation of outcomes — Future program design will need to include clear targets and mechanisms for measuring success to ensure that quality evidence is used to assess each program’s effectiveness thus enabling the effective shaping of future policy;

• Improving and sustaining career development pathways through connected programs — Programs need to focus more on the complete ‘pipeline’ from early childhood through school and post-secondary education to sustained employment and career opportunities. Rather than just creating an identified position or undertaking a one-off or short-term business intervention, programs need to provide sustained levels of support.

Recommended improvements at the strategic level include:

• Adopting a life course approach and restructuring the program investment portfolio accordingly — Taking into account evidence of the impact of certain events and developments throughout a person’s life (such as experiences in early childhood and educational achievements) on employment outcomes, will be essential to ensure that Aboriginal people are equipped with the necessary skills and capabilities to be able to take up employment opportunities;

• Leveraging growth industries and regions — Leveraging the opportunities available in growing industries and acknowledging the variety of labour markets in different regions of NSW will be important if the required levels of employment for Aboriginal people are to be achieved;

• Strengthening partnerships with the private sector — Establishing targeted partnerships with the private sector will be essential to link Aboriginal people with available employment and business opportunities; and

• Developing a master plan for enhancing economic participation of Aboriginal people in NSW — Such a master plan, or overarching strategic framework, would serve to address the limited coordination of programs and initiatives within NSW as well as set the stage for the development of a joined-up approach between NSW and the Commonwealth Governments. This master plan should favour place-based approaches and encourage buy-in from Aboriginal people through their involvement in its development and implementation. Strong governance arrangements as well as monitoring and evaluation frameworks that help to establish an evidence base are essential elements of such a plan.

Addressing the above requires a holistic approach that covers not only demand-side aspects relating to the creation of appropriate employment and business opportunities, but is equally focussed on appropriate linkages to supporting programs in education, health, welfare and public safety, that work together to ensure that Aboriginal people are ready to take on and have sustained careers through the opportunities presented.


The Allen Consulting Group 8

Chapter 1

Why getting Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives right is so important

1.1 Economic participation of Aboriginal people in NSW

At the 2006 census the Aboriginal population of NSW was 148,200 — making up 2.2 per cent of the state population (ABS 2007). Between the 2001 and 2006 census the Aboriginal population grew at a rate of 9.9 per cent. In its 2011 performance audit of Two Ways Together, the NSW Audit Office estimated the Aboriginal Population of NSW to be 160,000 (Audit Office of NSW 2011).

As shown in Table 1.1, in 2010 the Aboriginal unemployment rate in NSW was 18.1 per cent, compared to 5.1 per cent among the non-Aboriginal population.

Table 1.1

ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATES BY STATE AND TERRITORY, PER CENT (2010)

State/Territory Aboriginal unemployment rate

Non-Aboriginal unemployment rate

Total unemployment rate

Aboriginal labour force participation

Australian Capital Territory 13.1 3.2 3.3 71.5

New South Wales 18.1 5.1 5.3 50.8

Northern Territory 7.4(a) 2.3 3.1 43.6

Queensland 19.6 5.2 5.6 64.0

South Australia 26.6 5.0 5.3 53.7

Tasmania 12.0 5.5 5.7 62.2

Victoria 16.3 5.3 5.3 62.0

Western Australia 22.1 4.2 4.6 54.5

Total Australia 18.1 5.0 5.2 55.6

Source: ABS (2011) Note: (a) The comparatively low unemployment rate for the Northern Territory is likely due to a lower labour force participation rate for Aboriginal people than in other states and territories, and high participation rates in the CDEP program, as CDEP participation is classified as employment. In 2006, there were 14,600 Aboriginal people participating in the CDEP scheme, 37 per cent of which lived in the Northern Territory (ABS 2010).

There is no state-level information that provides a breakdown of Aboriginal employment in the public and private sectors. However, the 2006 census indicates that, Australia-wide, 74 per cent of employed Aboriginal people work in the private sector, with the remaining 26 per cent working in the public sector (ABS 2010). The figure for private sector employment includes those employed in the NGO sector.

The 2006 census also shows that, throughout Australia, the largest proportion of employed Aboriginal people work in the following industries: public administration and safety (18 per cent); health care and social assistance (15 per cent); education and training (9 per cent); retail trade (8 per cent); and manufacturing (8 per cent) (ABS 2010).



The same data provides an occupational breakdown of employed Aboriginal people in Australia. The most common occupations reported in 2006 are: labourers (24 per cent); community and personal service workers (16 per cent); and clerical and administrative workers (13 per cent).

Similarly, there is no specific information available on the number of Aboriginal businesses operating in NSW. However estimates from the 2006 census indicate that 1,939 Indigenous people in NSW work in their own business (ABS 2010). This represents 1.3 per cent of Indigenous people in NSW, compared to 7.3 per cent of non-Indigenous people. Table 1.2 outlines this data.

Table 1.2

ABORIGINAL PEOPLE WORKING IN THEIR OWN BUSINESSES

Aboriginal & Torres

Strait Islander Non-Aboriginal &

Torres Strait Islander Total

Number of persons working in own business in NSW 1,939 486,399 491,128(a)

Number of persons working in own business/1000 persons in NSW 13.09 72.93 N/A

% of population owning a business 1.3% 7.3% 7.2%

% of all business owners in NSW 0.4% 99.0% N/A

Note: (a) Number of persons working in own business do not add to the total figures provided. The data are represented as found. Source: Allen Consulting Group, using data from ABS (2010).

Closing the gap through economic development and employment programs

Over the past decade, the Australian and state and territory governments have increasingly recognised the importance of closing the gap in economic and social outcomes between Aboriginal people and the wider community, and the benefits this brings for both individuals and the society as a whole (see Box 1.1).



Box 1.1 ANCILLARY BENEFITS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT

Successful economic development and employment programs can assist Aboriginal people attain and sustain jobs and their own business. As well as improved financial security and prosperity, sustainable employment and economic development brings substantial ancillary benefits for the individual concerned, their families and communities. For individuals, such benefits were found to include: • improved physical health outcomes — increasing wealth is strongly correlated with an increase in life expectancy (up to a

certain level); • lower levels of adverse mental health outcomes, greater self-esteem and richer social interaction; and, • opportunities for personal development. For families, the benefits of sustainable employment and economic development may include: • reduced reliance on income support, which can prevent long-term welfare dependency; • improved health outcomes; • reduced incidence of family breakdown and social alienation; • improved family interaction; • an improvement in early childhood outcomes; and, • potential intergenerational effects in the cultivation of positive role models for children. For communities, sustainable employment and economic development may help to: • address entrenched social disadvantage; • reduce criminal activity; • lower the levels of welfare dependency; • increase social cohesion; and, • decrease the levels of anti-social behaviour, including drug, substance and alcohol abuse.

Source: Productivity Commission (2011); Marmot and Wilkinson (2006).

Among the policies and strategies at NSW and federal level relevant to economic development and employment of Aboriginal people are:

• the NSW Government’s Aboriginal Affairs Plan 2003-12: Two Ways Together — Partnerships: A New Way of Doing Business with Aboriginal People, developed in 2003 — The Plan aims to improve the social, economic, cultural and emotional wellbeing of Aboriginal people in NSW; among other goals, it aims to increase Aboriginal employment, enhance the skills and capacity of Aboriginal communities and individuals, and develop committed partnerships between Aboriginal people and the NSW Government (NSW Government 2003);

• the 2008 Council of Australian Governments (COAG) National Indigenous Reform Agreement (NIRA) along with its National Integrated Strategy for Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage (Closing the Gap) — Among many other objectives, the NIRA aims at halving the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade, with one of the building blocks being enhanced economic participation of Indigenous people (COAG 2008a; COAG 2008b);

• the 2008 National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation (NPA IEP) along with its 2009 NSW Implementation Plan — These are aimed at significantly improving opportunities for Indigenous people to engage in private and public sector jobs through:



– creating sustainable employment in areas of government service delivery that have previously relied on subsidisation through the Community Development Employment Projects program;

– strengthening current government procurement policies to maximise Indigenous employment;

– incorporating Indigenous workforce strategies into all new major COAG reforms contributing to the Closing the Gap targets; and

– reviewing all Public Sector Indigenous employment and career development strategies, in order to increase employment to reflect national Indigenous working age population share by 2015, currently projected to be at least 2.6 per cent (COAG 2010; Commonwealth of Australia and NSW Government 2009).

Various Aboriginal economic development and employment programs and initiatives have been developed and implemented in NSW, either in response to these policy frameworks or to address other needs and gaps identified. However, due to a lack of outcome and/or impact evaluations, little is known at this stage as to whether these initiatives have delivered the intended improvement in outcomes. A recent NSW Auditor-General’s performance audit report of Two Ways Together found that the plan ‘has not delivered the improvement in overall outcomes for Aboriginal people that was intended’ (Audit Office of NSW 2011).

1.2 This report

The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the Hon. Victor Dominello MP, has requested an independent review of Aboriginal economic development and employment programs delivered by NSW Government agencies. The Allen Consulting Group was commissioned by Aboriginal Affairs NSW (AANSW) to undertake this review.

Overview of initiatives to be reviewed

Table 1.3 lists the NSW Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives included in this review, as specified in the project terms of reference.

These initiatives do not represent all programs and strategies in place in NSW to support the economic development employment of Aboriginal people; rather they are the set of initiatives that were identified as important for the purposes of this review.



Table 1.3

OVERVIEW OF ABORIGINAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT INITIATIVES UNDER REVIEW

Initiative under review Agency responsible for implementation

Status and duration of the initiative Nature of the initiative

Job Compacts AANSW Launched in mid-2006, first Job Compact signed mid-2007, fully implemented (as of September 2011)

Strategic framework

Aboriginal Jobs Together AANSW Launched in March 2011 and due to end in June 2013

Program under the NSW Aboriginal Employment Program (NAEP)

Aboriginal Participation in Construction (APIC) Guidelines

AANSW Original guidelines launched in 2001, revised in 2007; two-year trial of their strengthened application underway from January 2011 to June 2013

Guidelines under the NAEP

Aboriginal Participation in Procurement (APIP) Guidelines

AANSW In draft form, two-year trial scheduled to run from mid-2011 to mid-2013 (trial yet to commence)


Initiatives for the local government sector

AANSW Launched in October 2011 and due to end in June 2013


Aboriginal Communities Development Program (ACDP)

AANSW Launched in 1998 and completed in June 2011

Program

Economic Development Officer (EDO) Network

AANSW and NSW Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS)

Launched in February 2010, fully implemented; funding to conclude June 2012

Program

Aboriginal Business Development Program (ABDP)

DTIRIS Launched in 1998, fully implemented (as of September 2011)

Program

Making It Our Business (MIOB): the NSW Aboriginal Employment Action Plan

Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC)

Strategy launched in 2006, action plan launched in November 2009, currently being implemented (as of September 2011)

Strategy/action plan (contributing to public sector employment targets under the NAEP)

Aboriginal Training Coordinators

Department of Education and Communities (DEC), State Training Services (STS)

Not applicable Staff positions, not a program

The Way Ahead for Aboriginal People

DEC STS Launched in 2004, fully implemented (as of September 2011)

Program

New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP)


Program

Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officers (AEDO) Program


Program

Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program (EDAEP)


Program

Source: Allen Consulting Group (2011).



Structure of this report and project methodology

In order to inform future directions by the NSW Government, the review intentionally focuses on the key aspects of programs as outlined in the terms of reference. To the extent possible, the data and information obtained were used to identify:

• the costs of the identified programs to date;

• the number of job placements, traineeships and cadetships created as a result of the programs (including long-term job placements created as a result of the traineeships and cadetships);

• the retention rates of job placements;

• the duration of each program; and

• the rationale1 for undertaking the program.

In addition, the project sought to identify factors which have contributed, or have been barriers, to the success of individual initiatives. This examination of initiatives is provided in Chapter 2.

Chapter 3 presents an analysis of the suite of programs with a view to assessing, to the extent possible, their combined impact on employment and business activity of Aboriginal people in NSW. This includes consideration of the program rationales, issues related to the design and implementation of initiatives and potential gaps and duplication in objectives and service delivery. This chapter also presents some conclusions and recommendations designed to make NSW Aboriginal employment and economic development programs more effective and efficient.

Chapter 4 outlines broader considerations on what is necessary to more effectively and efficiently address Aboriginal disadvantage through a well-coordinated set of economic development and employment programs.

Data collection

In undertaking the program review during September 2011, the project team has conducted:

• an analysis of existing quantitative and qualitative data (both published and unpublished) pertaining to the Aboriginal economic development and employment programs in question; this included both published/peer reviewed literature as well as internal documents such as monthly/quarterly/annual reports, evaluation reports, case studies, survey results, and quantitative data collections;

• consultations and follow-up interviews (both face-to-face and by telephone) with program managers of the initiatives under review; and

• interviews with other stakeholders holding relevant information.

1 The initial tender brief sought assessment of the ‘evidence base for undertaking the program’. However, it was

later clarified with AANSW that instead of assessing the evidence base (i.e. whether programs are based on interventions that have been evaluated, such as through a randomised controlled trial, and found to produce the desired results), the project aims to assess the rationale for developing a program (i.e. program development and implementation is based on evidence of an identified gap or need in service delivery and/or responds to policy requirements such as a COAG commitment).



In relation to the data reviewed it is noted that there is no central data storage, which would provide state- or system-wide data on the outcomes of Aboriginal economic development and employment efforts. As a result, there are variations in data availability and specificity and there are differences in the levels of consistency, accuracy and currency of data.



Chapter 2

Review of individual programs

2.1 Overview

Table 2.1 provides a snapshot of the components assessed for each initiative as outlined in Chapter 1. Areas where relevant data were not available or insufficient to inform an assessment are marked accordingly in the table — either as ‘not documented’, ‘no/limited data available’ or ‘too early to assess’. Each initiative is discussed in greater detail following the table.



Table 2.1

OVERVIEW OF PROGRAMS UNDER REVIEW

Name Duration Program rationale Funding/Costs Outputs/Outcomes

Job Compacts Mid-2006 to current

Original: • Overarching Agreement on Aboriginal Affairs,

signed by NSW and Commonwealth Governments

• NSW State Plan • Two Ways Together • High Aboriginal unemployment rate Current: • National Partnership Agreement on Aboriginal

Economic Participation (COAG)

• $200,000 in 2007-08 • No specific funding, relies on

existing departmental resources.

No data available (not possible to evaluate success of all individual Job Compacts and the combined impact of the Job Compacts initiative; job creation unable to be determined)

Aboriginal Jobs Together

March 2011 to June 2013

• National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation (COAG)

• Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care NSW programs —Enhanced Aboriginal Residential Support Worker program, and Aboriginal Home Care Drivers Program

• Historical disadvantage, high unemployment rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness, impacts of long-term unemployment, geographical disadvantage

• $7.8m funding for total duration under the New South Wales Aboriginal Employment Program

• Costs by NDS and AbSec as of 30 May 2011: $37,552

• Too early to assess • (Objective: trial new approaches to partnering

with NGOs; 155 cadet/traineeship positions to be created; mentoring provided to cadets/trainees; cultural awareness training provided to NGOs)




Aboriginal Participation in Construction (APIC) Guidelines

2001 to current (first trial from approx. 2007-08 to 2008-09; second trial from January 2011 to June 2013)

Original: • Not documented Current: • National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous

Economic Participation (COAG) • Historical disadvantage, high unemployment

rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness, impacts of long-term unemployment, geographical disadvantage

No dedicated funding, relies on existing departmental resources.

Limited data available; 191 jobs and traineeships from first trial

Aboriginal Participation in Procurement (APIP) Guidelines

Scheduled to be trialled from mid-2011 to mid-2013 (trial yet to commence)


• Historical disadvantage, high unemployment rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness, impacts of long-term unemployment, geographic disadvantage


Too early to assess

Initiatives for the local government sector

October 2011 to June 2013


• Historical disadvantage, high unemployment rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness, impacts of long term unemployment, geographic disadvantage


Too early to assess

Aboriginal Communities Development Program (ACDP)

1998 to 2011 Create opportunities for Aboriginal people to obtain a building trade qualification and to encourage economic development through the establishment of Aboriginal building companies.

$240m for entire program; approximately $9m for education and training element.

• Training: 230 individuals enrolled in formal training programs, 63 completed apprenticeships

• Economic development: Aboriginal building companies were established in 15 locations, two companies are currently operational.




Economic Development Officer (EDO) Network

February 2010 to June 2012

• NSW State Plan (supported by the Aboriginal Affairs Plan, and Two Ways Together)

• National Indigenous Reform Agreement, Closing the Gap

• low proportion of Aboriginal businesses, and lack of business skills among Aboriginal people

• entrenched social and economic disadvantage

$2.9m dollars for entire duration. To date (as of 20 June 2011): • 61 workshops/training sessions attended by

1010 people • 78 new businesses established, 315 assisted • 158 referred to financial and other support • 242 provided with mentoring and support • 145 jobs created

Aboriginal Business Development Program (ABDP)

1998 to current • Feedback from Aboriginal people • High small business exit rates • Entrenched social and economic disadvantage

Funding: • 2008-09: $500,000 • 2009-10: $400,000 • 2010-11: $400,000 • 2011-12: $450,000 The ABDP also has access to mainstream DTIRIS budget and programs

• Overall highly satisfied response from 27 respondents to client survey

• Positive client feedback about business support and trade show outcomes

• Predominantly ‘very useful’ workshops (Note: not all workshops participants responded)

Making It Our Business (MIOB): the NSW Aboriginal Employment Action Plan

2006 to current Improve recruitment, retention and career development for Aboriginal employees in the NSW public sector


Program success is determined by an increase in the aggregate percentage of Aboriginal employment in the NSW public sector

Aboriginal Training Coordinators

Not applicable due to Aboriginal Training Coordinators being positions, not a program (for details, see Section 2.11).




The Way Ahead for Aboriginal People

2004 to current Original: • Not documented Current: • National Indigenous Reform Agreement;

National Integrated Strategy for Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage (COAG)

$350,000/year in 2007-08 and 2010-11.

Aboriginal apprentices mentored: • 2007-08: 173 • 2008-09: 203 • 2009-10: 236 • 2010-11: 298 Additional data indicates that 317 were mentored in 2010-11, possibly due to a continuation of mentoring from the previous year.

New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP)

1989 to current Not documented $1,259,990 in 2010-11

In 2010-11: • 5,941 clients advised/assisted • 514 of these placed in employment • 544 of these commenced vocational education

and training

Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officers (AEDO) Program

1990 to current Not documented $691,517 in 2010-11

In 2010-11: • 994 provided with business support • 27 new Aboriginal businesses established

Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program (EDAEP)

1988 to current Original: • Not documented Current: • National Integrated Strategy for Closing the

Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage Closing the Gap strategy (COAG); National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation (COAG)

$1.9m in 2010-11 In 2010-11, the program funded: • 25 permanent positions • 9 temporary positions (secondments) • 1 career development (training) placement • 8 graduate positions • 5 community partnership projects




2.2 Job Compacts

Duration Program rationale Funding/Costs Outputs/Outcomes

Mid-2006 to current

Original: • Overarching Agreement on Aboriginal

Affairs, signed by NSW and Commonwealth Governments

• NSW State Plan • Two Ways Together • High Aboriginal unemployment rate Current: • National Partnership Agreement on

Aboriginal Economic Participation (COAG)

• $200,000 in 2007-08

• No specific funding, relies on existing departmental resources.

No data available (not possible to evaluate success of all individual Job Compacts and the combined impact of the Job Compacts initiative; job creation unable to be determined)

Description

The Job Compacts program is run by AANSW. According to AANSW background documents, the program aims to change the context of Aboriginal employment by encouraging the development of partnerships and networks between industry groups, businesses, community groups and Aboriginal job seekers (AANSW 2010).

Job Compacts themselves are two-year agreements signed by interested stakeholders within a particular location or industry, and are headed by a steering committee. The agreements create a forum in which stakeholders can discuss issues relating to barriers and opportunities for Aboriginal job seekers (AANSW 2009a; 2010). Background documents and consultations with AANSW staff indicate that a wide range of stakeholders are involved, including local governments, the NSW Aboriginal Land Council, the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR), and the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) (AANSW 2008).

According to background documents, it was envisaged that Job Compacts would interact with other initiatives aimed at enhancing private sector employment. In particular, these documents list the Aboriginal Participation in Construction (APIC) Guidelines to be a key mechanism for implementing Job Compacts (AANSW 2008). Consultations with AANSW staff also indicate that Job Compacts draw upon regionally available employment resources such as the New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP) program. The extent to which these initiatives collaborate, however, could not be quantified by this review.

Duration

According to the AANSW program manager, the Job Compacts program was launched in mid-2006, and the first Job Compact was signed in mid-2007. At the time of writing, the program has been running for more than four years



Program rationale

Documents provided by AANSW indicate that Job Compacts were initially developed under the NSW State Plan to complement the Two Ways Together strategy. The initiative also draws upon the Overarching Agreement on Aboriginal Affairs 2005–2010, which was signed by the NSW and Commonwealth Governments as part of the implementation of Two Ways Together (AANSW 2009a). Currently, Job Compacts are reported under the Council of Australian Governments’ National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation (NPA IEP).

According to internal documents provided by the program manager the key drivers for Job Compacts were reported to be high unemployment rates among Aboriginal people, and labour supply shortages. Also mentioned were ancillary aims, such as the need to reduce relatively high incarceration rates, referencing research from the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics (2002) relating crime to socio-economic disadvantage.

Additionally, the Overarching Job Compact — Memorandum of Understanding cites the need to overcome barriers for Aboriginal jobseekers, such as: a lack of Aboriginal cultural awareness among employers; intergenerational unemployment and a lack of positive role models; lower skills and education levels among Aboriginal school-leavers; and a lack of support infrastructure for Aboriginal employees, such as mentoring and suitable transport (NSW Government n.d.).

Funding and costs

Job Compacts received one-off funding of $200,000 from the NSW Government in 2007-08 (AANSW 2009a). According to the AANSW program manager the majority of this funding was spent on cultural awareness training for stakeholders involved. No subsequent funding has been made available to run Job Compacts, and costs incurred are not recorded.

Outputs and outcomes

Insufficient data exist to assess the outputs and outcomes of these individual Job Compacts and the Job Compacts program as a whole. In particular, stakeholders highlighted difficulties in obtaining employment data due to challenges in differentiating employment created through a Job Compact from employment created independently of it.

Qualitative evidence obtained during conversations with the program manager suggests that the success of Job Compacts has varied across regions and industries. However, consultations with regional AANSW staff indicated that in many cases employment generation has not occurred, with little progress made on identifying job opportunities and difficulties encountered in maintaining stakeholder interest.



While data about program outcomes are not collected, some data related to processes and activities exist, such as the numbers of Job Compacts and meetings held. According to an internal AANSW document, eleven Job Compacts are currently in existence. The program manager stated that ten of these are overseen by AANSW, while the Redfern–Waterloo Authority runs one. Operational records indicate that seven of the ten Job Compacts overseen by AANSW have a steering committee. The operational records also list a total of 201 meetings between stakeholders involved in these ten Job Compacts, including 61 Steering Committee meetings and 17 meetings between employers and other signatories.

Success factors

The AANSW program manager believes that Job Compacts are more likely to be successful where a greater number of stakeholders are involved, and where existing resources, such as job placement officers within the New Careers for Aboriginal People Program (NCAP), are utilised. It is believed that creating stronger linkages between Job Compacts and other employment programs will generate greater benefits. However, specific information should be collected to verify this, such as the number of jobs created and procedural information about how they are created, as well as qualitative information about the views of those involved in the job creation process.

Additionally, the place-based nature of the program, together with its intended flexibility and adaptability to local and industry needs, has the potential to assist stakeholders involved in Job Compacts to better identify and target local employment issues.

All persons consulted believe Job Compacts to be a valuable concept in altering the overall context of Aboriginal employment, engaging the relevant stakeholders, and raising awareness among employers about the benefits of employing Aboriginal people.

Barriers to success

Consultations identified a need to better define the program and its aims. In particular, it was unclear whether a Job Compact is, as had been initially envisaged, a forum in which to discuss job opportunities without signatories being expected to undertake job creation, or whether it is a job placement program. According to the AANSW staff consulted, the initial lack of clear outcomes and aims resulted in signatories seeking to identify jobs within their organisations, such as mining jobs in the Murdi Paaki Job Compact, and transforming Job Compacts towards job placement. Such measures have reportedly been difficult to progress, and contributed to a loss of momentum within some Job Compacts.

Another key barrier identified was the lack of a dedicated person with responsibility for each Job Compact. AANSW staff indicated that AANSW regional managers play an oversight role, but highlighted the importance of leadership and personal commitments of decision-makers within companies. A number of AANSW staff consulted indicated that Job Compacts stalled if such ‘champions’ ceased to be involved.



Consultations also identified that the long time frame of Job Compacts changes the composition of signatories, thus affecting momentum of Job Compacts. AANSW staff indicated that, when persons originally involved in Job Compacts left signatory organisations, replacement representatives were often unaware of the original impetus for Job Compacts within their organisations and/or were reluctant to participate. For example, key signatories to a particular Job Compact are reportedly so reluctant to progress it that AANSW staff believe it better to negotiate a new Job Compact with other more interested companies.

The very nature of Job Compacts as a strategic and collaborative forum to connect stakeholders creates complexities in the tracking of outcomes. Although operational records measure the number of job opportunities, and barriers identified and addressed, it is difficult to monitor the associated outcomes given the large numbers of stakeholders involved in each Job Compact.

One AANSW staff member also cited a lack of funding to be a barrier, stating that even small additional funds would be sufficient to significantly progress Job Compacts. The money could be used, for instance, to fund TAFE to undertake targeted cultural awareness training within companies. An AANSW regional manager cited another funding-related example of attempts to place Aboriginal people within the local racing industry. These attempts could not proceed because DEEWR — the principal funder — preferred to target the job placements through a different program to Job Compacts.

AANSW regional managers also considered duplication with other employment programs to be an impediment to Job Compacts. One AANSW staff member noted that members of Job Compacts’ steering committees are often involved in similar employment focussed programs run by other agencies, such as Centrelink, and are thus meeting to discuss similar issues in multiple forums.

2.3 Aboriginal Jobs Together


March 2011 to June 2013


• Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care NSW programs —Enhanced Aboriginal Residential Support Worker program, and Aboriginal Home Care Drivers Program


• $7.8m funding for total duration under the New South Wales Aboriginal Employment Program

• Costs by NDS and AbSec as of 30 May 2011: $37,552

• Too early to assess • (Objective: trial new

approaches to partnering with NGOs; 155 cadet/traineeship positions to be created; mentoring provided to cadets/trainees; cultural awareness training provided to NGOs)

Description

Aboriginal Jobs Together is a trial being run under the New South Wales Aboriginal Employment Program (NAEP). It is managed by AANSW with a number of other departments involved, including the Department of Education and Communities NSW (DEC) through its State Training Services (STS), and DEEWR.



Internal documents provided by the program manager state that Aboriginal Jobs Together aims to trial innovative approaches to the recruitment, retention, development and progression of Aboriginal staff in the non-government organisation (NGO) sector. This includes:

• trialling approaches to building partnering arrangements with the NGO sector;

• trialling the inclusion of targets in NGO funding agreements;

• testing the provision of support (such as mentoring) to Aboriginal staff; and

• testing the provision of support to assist participating organisations to attract and retain Aboriginal staff, including the improvement of cultural competency in the workplace and in service delivery.

Under the program, 155 cadetships and traineeships will be created in 40 NGOs, with the ultimate aim of generating sustainable employment for Aboriginal people. These positions are being coordinated by two peak organisations: the National Disability Services (NDS) will auspice 110 positions and the Aboriginal Child, Family and Community Care State Secretariat (AbSec) will auspice 40 positions. To create and support these cadetships and traineeships, these peak bodies are liaising with both member and non-member NGOs.

Support to cadets/trainees and participating organisations is to be provided by a specialist Aboriginal Employment Unit within the STS, which has been established for the purpose of this program.

Duration

The program itself is scheduled to run from its commencement in March 2011 until June 2013, when funding under the NAEP concludes. This period includes time for preparatory work and the establishment of traineeships/cadetships.

Program rationale

AANSW documents indicate that the underlying drivers of NAEP programs, including Aboriginal Jobs Together, include the historical disadvantage of Aboriginal people, high unemployment rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness among employers and the corresponding difficulties for Aboriginal employees, the impacts of long-term unemployment, and geographic disadvantage.

More specific drivers of the program include the growing need for community and disability services, and especially culturally appropriate services for Aboriginal people. Internal documents cite a number of surveys and reports highlighting the demand for Aboriginal staff in community services roles, and the difficulty in attracting and retaining them.2

2 See: Australian Services Union (ASU) 2007, Building social inclusion in Australia: Priorities for the social

and community services sector workforce, Discussion paper, Melbourne; Cortis N, Hilferty F, Chan, S and Tannous, K 2009, Labour dynamics and the non-government community services workforce in NSW, Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney; and, KPMG 2006, Investigation into disability workforce capacity issues, National Disability Administrators Research Report.



In particular, the disability employment aspect of Aboriginal Jobs Together is based on two programs run by the Department of Ageing and Home Care NSW (ADHC), both having reportedly increased the employment of Aboriginal staff across a number of identified and mainstream positions. These are the Enhanced Aboriginal Residential Support Worker Program and the Aboriginal Home Care Drivers Program, which, together with ADHC’s reportedly successful fostering of a supportive work environment for Aboriginal people, were drawn upon for the design of Aboriginal Jobs Together. An investigation of the actual outcomes of the ADHC program is beyond the scope of this project.

According to AANSW, the design phase of Aboriginal Jobs Together included consultation with peak industry bodies and with NSW agencies. Additionally, a logic model has been developed to guide the program.

Funding and costs

Aboriginal Jobs Together is the only NAEP program to receive direct funding. It has been allocated $7.8 million for its entire duration. Funding for Aboriginal Jobs Together covers both direct spending on the cadets/trainees themselves, as well as funding to improve the context of employment within participating NGOs in order to promote job sustainability and enhance future employment opportunities.

The NSW Government is providing $4.8 million of the funding, which covers:

• support packages for NGOs to improve their approaches to recruiting and retaining Aboriginal staff;

• support for cadets and trainees, including pre-employment support, for example, to obtain drivers licences and ensure adequate literacy and numeracy skills; and non-vocational support such as access to computers;

• training for the cadets and trainees (funding provided by STS);

• the creation of three full-time mentor positions within STS, and mentoring for all cadets/trainees (STS is contributing its internal funds to mentor 125 cadets/trainees, as the program budget initially allocated mentoring funds for only 30 cadets/trainees); and

• other resources and tools to assist STS with supporting NGOs, trainees and cadets.

In addition to NSW funding, DEEWR is providing $3 million directly to participating NGOs as employment support for cadets/trainees.

As the program is in its preparatory phase, costs incurred to date (between March and June 2011) have been administrative in nature. Internal documents provided by the program manager indicate that NDS has spent $21,552 on project staff recruitment, salaries, administration and overheads, while AbSec has spent approximately $16,000 on financial management software and insurances (NDS 2011).


As the trial has not yet commenced, it is too early to assess outputs and/or outcomes of the program.



A performance framework has been developed and data about outputs and outcomes are expected to be available through the program’s reporting systems. A program evaluation to be conducted by AANSW is also expected to assist in assessing the program’s outputs and outcomes.

Success factors

According to the STS program manager, who is involved with the mentoring aspects of Aboriginal Jobs Together, indicators of success include the program’s holistic case management, together with its links to existing agencies and resources — such as DEEWR, Job Services Australia and the STS’s training and mentoring capabilities.

Additionally, the AANSW program manager noted that AbSec and the NDS will be working closely with the Aboriginal Services Branch of STS, including the Aboriginal Employment Unit, to best leverage the existing mentoring and training service. This working relationship will also seek to minimise duplication, particularly to ensure that funding recipients (NGOs) do not access more than one source of funding for their apprenticeships/traineeships (such as funding separately available from DEEWR under Commonwealth programs).

Both AbSec and the NDS flagged that the level of interest from NGOs will be a critical factor in the program’s success; stakeholder consultations have indicated that the program is currently over-subscribed, i.e. there is interest in creating more than 155 cadetships/traineeships.

The STS program manager considers Aboriginal Jobs Together to be a well-documented program, with a comprehensive reporting system that is anticipated to enable careful tracking of program implementation and results. The first periodic project reports issued by AbSec and the NDS present comprehensive details of progress against program objectives. A section in these reports relating to foreseeable impediments provides a mechanism to flag barriers to the projects’ success early (NDS 2011).

Barriers to success

The NDS cited concerns that a ‘lack of project certainty from key governmental stakeholders’ and ‘stakeholder communication’ presents significant challenges (NDS 2011).

During consultations, the STS program manager cited a belief that there have been delays in implementation that may impact program quality. He stated that if the program is fast-tracked to meet implementation and funding timeframes, there is a risk that important worker training and workplace preparation will not be fully undertaken, thus repeating mistakes made in other Aboriginal employment programs. In this context, it is important to note that the AANSW program manager does not consider there to be any delays, and considers that program processes are transpiring as expected.

The STS program manager also reports that time lags have affected the utilisation of program resources. For instance, STS advisors were reportedly hired in March 2011, however, that cadet/trainee positions have not yet commenced has frustrated advisors and resulted in their services being unutilised.



2.4 Aboriginal Participation in Construction (APIC) Guidelines


2001 to current (first trial from approx. 2007-08 to 2008-09; second trial from January 2011 to June 2013)

Original: • Not documented Current: • National Partnership Agreement on

Indigenous Economic Participation (COAG)


• No dedicated funding, relies on existing departmental resources.

Limited data available; 191 jobs and traineeships from first trial

Description

The Aboriginal Participation in Construction (APIC) Guidelines are administered by AANSW. They are a voluntary initiative aimed at increasing the employment of Aboriginal people on government construction projects, and are envisaged to be a key mechanism assisting the Job Compacts initiative (AANSW 2008). They form part of the NAEP and the NSW Government Procurement Policy (NSW Government 2006). For selected construction projects the APIC Guidelines require participating government agencies to:

• require service providers to meet agreed Aboriginal participation targets and report on the delivery of Aboriginal development outcomes; and

• seek to use service providers with a commitment and demonstrated ability to effectively plan and implement Aboriginal participation (NSW Government 2006).

The APIC Guidelines themselves list processes through which government agencies are to approach construction contracts, including the selection of appropriate projects and conditions of tender (NSW Government 2006). Targets for Aboriginal employment are to be detailed in Aboriginal Participation Plans developed for each construction project, and according to the program manager, such targets are expected to vary depending on the type and location of construction projects. The AANSW program manager also indicated that best practice employment processes, such as those outlined in the APIC Guidelines, are already followed by a number of NSW Government agencies and that the APIC Guidelines serve to formalise such initiatives.

The AANSW program manager stated that AANSW and NSW Procurement have provided guidance to participating agencies regarding preparatory work for the Guidelines. This has involved participating agencies working with communities and arranging support for subcontractors. Agencies have also been provided with assistance to set employment targets. Support resources are additionally available on the NSW Procurement website and include checklists, templates, and a list of Aboriginal contractors (NSW Procurement 2011).



Duration

According to the AANSW program manager and internal documents, the APIC Guidelines have been in place since 2001 and were revised in 2007 and trialled under the NSW State Plan 2007. This trial concluded in June 2009, and involved the application of the APIC Guidelines in 15 selected construction projects.

Another two-year trial is being conducted from January 2011 to June 2013, in which the APIC Guidelines have a strengthened application. According to the AANSW program manager, this strengthening arises from a requirement that participating agencies apply the APIC Guidelines to all eligible projects, and apply the strictest standard of the APIC Guidelines. The AANSW program manager indicated that the present trial involves construction projects for six agencies, and is at the stage of nominating and tendering for projects.

Program rationale

The APIC Guidelines align to procurement targets in the NPA IEP, and form a key mechanism to achieve these targets. Although internal AANSW documents state that the APIC Guidelines were revised in 2007, details of this revision are not available. Furthermore, the AANSW program manager indicated that the earlier trial of the APIC Guidelines was not evaluated due to a lack of funding, and that consequently the APIC Guidelines have not been updated since 2007.

The APIC Guidelines document itself states that the original rationale stems from an identified opportunity to leverage the $7 billion/annum spent on NSW Government construction projects, particularly projects that are directed to or predominantly benefitting Aboriginal communities; have an Aboriginal community as a key user group or stakeholder; or have the potential to benefit an Aboriginal community (NSW Government 2006).

General factors underlying NAEP programs, including the APIC Guidelines, include those outlined in Section 2.3 for Aboriginal Jobs Together.

Funding and costs

The AANSW project manager advised that although the APIC Guidelines are an initiative under the NAEP, it does not receive any direct NAEP funding. Instead, AANSW and NSW Procurement devote existing internal resources to perform their role in implementing the Guidelines.

The project manager noted that no data were available regarding the potential costs involved in implementing the APIC Guidelines. However, a cost-benefit analysis undertaken to inform the design of the Aboriginal Participation in Procurement (APIP) Guidelines identified no substantial cost increases in relation to implementation of the APIC Guidelines nor for a similar initiative in Queensland. It is noted that the documents do not provide evidence for these statements. The AANSW program manager expects costs to be minimal, particularly as construction projects in any case require processes such as community consultation. The APIC Guidelines would ensure stronger consideration of Aboriginal issues in such community consultations.




No funding was available to formally evaluate the first trial undertaken through the NSW State Plan 2007, however, the AANSW program manager has indicated that all NAEP programs will be evaluated and that program data collection is being designed for the current trial of the APIC Guidelines.

At the time of writing, information being collected from agencies includes the identification of key performance indicator (KPI) data that are already collected by agencies. Data collection is to also be informed by a project logic that is being drafted at the time of writing.

Employment opportunities created

Data provided by the AANSW program manager indicate that during the first trial at least 191 Aboriginal people were involved in construction projects either as employees or trainees. However, there is no information available from which to identify whether or not these positions were created as a direct result of the Guidelines. No other data from the trial were available to assist this review.

Retention

No data are available regarding retention rates for jobs and traineeships created under the APIC Guidelines.

The APIC Guidelines themselves require agencies to ‘retain and centralise records of the performance of its contractors in relation to Aboriginal participation’, and such records may at least contain useful qualitative data about project outputs and outcomes, successes and barriers (NSW Government 2006).

In any case, without a full impact evaluation it is not possible to identify whether these jobs and traineeships are a direct result of the APIC Guidelines, or whether they would have been created independently of the APIC Guidelines. Furthermore, the fact that many agencies may have already put in place similar guidelines creates greater difficulty in determining the APIC Guidelines’ impacts.

Success factors and barriers

The lack of evaluative data from the first APIC trial means that it is not possible to comment on the program’s success or otherwise and to draw conclusions as to which factors contributed to either success or failure. However, the AANSW program manager indicates that — like other NAEP trials — the present trial will be evaluated.

According to the AANSW program manager, the variety of employers involved may render the monitoring and recording of program outputs difficult. Particular difficulty may arise as subcontracts are likely to perform the majority of work, and not the contractors who have a direct relationship with government agencies as part of the APIC program. Nonetheless, data will be collected through the present trial as mentioned above.



2.5 Aboriginal Participation in Procurement (APIP) Guidelines


Scheduled to be trialled from mid-2011 to mid-2013 (trial yet to commence)


• Historical disadvantage, high unemployment rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness, impacts of long-term unemployment, geographic disadvantage


Too early to assess

Description

The APIP Guidelines are administered by AANSW. Internal AANSW documents state that the APIP Guidelines are part of the NAEP and contribute to achieving NPA IEP targets. They aim to increase Aboriginal employment by increasing the involvement of Aboriginal people in the provision of goods and services to the NSW Government. The APIP Guidelines complement the APIC Guidelines, and seek to extend them to a broader range of NSW Government contracts (NSW Government 2011).

Internal AANSW documents and consultations with the AANSW program manager indicate that government agencies using the APIP Guidelines will be supported by the Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council, the Industry Capability Network and other resources.

Duration

At the time of writing this report, the APIP Guidelines are in draft form. The Working Draft states that the Guidelines are due to be trialled from mid-2011 to mid-2013, that is, over the 2011-12 and 2012-13 financial years (NSW Government 2011). However, internal AANSW documents indicate that at the time of writing the trial has not commenced, with the APIP Working Group finalising the draft Guidelines and identifying organisations to participate in the trial.

Program rationale

According to internal AANSW documents provided by the program manager, the rationale for designing and implementing the program arises from the NSW Government’s commitment to the NPA IEP and from the potential to leverage the NSW Government’s $10 billion p.a. purchasing to encourage the employment of Aboriginal people in the private and non government sectors. The APIP Working Draft is similar to the APIC Guidelines document, and in fact states that the APIP program ‘builds on the existing APIC Guidelines’. Their design may also draw upon similar programs, such as the Indigenous Employment Policy in Queensland.

Additionally, the APIP Guidelines are underpinned by factors common to all NAEP programs, as outlined in Section 2.3 for Aboriginal Jobs Together.

Funding and costs

The AANSW program manager noted that no funding is provided, and that costs borne by agencies implementing the Guidelines are not expected to be substantial.



Internal AANSW documents provided by the program manager indicate that a cost-benefit analysis was undertaken during the program’s design phase. This involved a survey of two government agencies and two suppliers in order to assess the potential impacts of the draft Guidelines. The analysis revealed that agencies faced difficulty in quantifying the costs involved. However, the government agencies surveyed reportedly did not anticipate substantial cost increases in the tender process, with costs identified primarily relating to additional reporting and training requirements. Such statements appear to be based on the experience with implementing the APIC Guidelines or the Indigenous Employment Policy in Queensland, both of which are similar procurement initiatives, albeit confined to the building sector.

More comprehensive information may result from the trial of the APIP Guidelines, although the extent of data collection is presently unclear. It is suggested that the trial incorporate data collection about costs such as the training of Aboriginal employees, which may provide a greater understanding of the costs borne by agencies and suppliers in implementing the Guidelines.


As the guidelines are presently being formulated, there are no outputs or outcomes to report. However, the Working Draft states that AANSW will monitor and evaluate the APIP trial, and that key performance indicators are to be developed following the selection of guidelines to be trialled and development of a project logic (NSW Government 2011).

Success factors

Factors influencing the success of the program can be expected to be similar to those influencing the APIC Guidelines. Additionally, a broader range of suppliers is likely to be available for the APIP Guidelines compared to the APIC Guidelines given the wide range of goods and services to which the APIP Guidelines apply.

Internal documents and the AANSW program manager anticipate that initiatives linking these suppliers to government agencies, such as the Australian Indigenous Minority Supplier Council and the Industry Capability Network, will assist in the success of procurement initiatives.

Barriers to success

Barriers to success may also be similar to those arising for the APIC Guidelines. An additional barrier to the APIP Guidelines may arise from the wide range of goods and services under consideration. The AANSW program manager indicated that processes such as community consultation, which are required by the APIC Guidelines and are in fact already an inherent part of construction projects, may be difficult to undertake in relation to goods and services more generally. This suggests that, compared to the APIC Guidelines, the APIP Guidelines may create an additional cost burden.



The AANSW program manager also mentioned that a barrier may arise from the need to use preferred NSW Government suppliers in certain types of contracts in order to access support resources under the APIP program. This requirement may exclude smaller, less established businesses from participation if size is a criterion for becoming a preferred supplier.

Concerns raised by both agencies and suppliers surveyed as part of the cost-benefit analysis included tender compliance difficulties, particularly for small businesses, and ensuring a competitive tender with no commercial disadvantage. The analysis recognised difficulties in identifying costs and the need to obtain ‘more comprehensive advice (...) from suppliers’, and concluded that a full trial will be required to further inform drafting of the APIP Guidelines.

2.6 Initiatives for the Local Government Sector


October 2011 to June 2013


• Historical disadvantage, high unemployment rates, racism/lack of cultural awareness, impacts of long term unemployment, geographic disadvantage


Too early to assess

Description

AANSW is developing initiatives aimed at promoting the employment of Aboriginal people by local governments. This builds upon earlier work undertaken involving organisations including the Department of Local Government NSW (detailed below under ‘Program rationale’).

As the first working group meeting was held in early October 2011, the initiatives under this program are yet to be developed. However internal AANSW documents describe a dual approach involving seeking support from the Local Government and Shires Association of NSW, and supplying tools and resources to local governments.

Duration

Work on the initiatives formally commenced in October 2011 with the first working group meeting, and will end in June 2013.

Program rationale

AANSW documents indicate that the initiatives form part of the NAEP and are envisaged as contributing to the NSW Government’s efforts to achieve Aboriginal employment targets under the NPA IEP. Additional drivers for the initiatives include: the close contact between local governments and Aboriginal people, especially in remote regions of NSW which often have high Aboriginal populations; and socio economic factors underlying all NAEP programs as described in Section 2.3 for Aboriginal Jobs Together.



Additionally, earlier work provides context and resources for the current initiative. In 2007, the Department of Local Government NSW and the Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW developed Engaging with Aboriginal Communities — A resource kit for local governments in New South Wales. This toolkit was created with input from a number of NSW Government Departments and local councils, and comprises guidelines and principles that draw on the existing experience of the departments and councils that provided input (Department of Local Government NSW 2007). However, it should be noted that the views expressed in this toolkit do not necessarily represent the views of Aboriginal people in the relevant local government areas.

A discussion paper was also prepared and disseminated, ‘investigating the interrelationships between local government and Indigenous community engagement’ (AANSW 2009b). The discussion paper was distributed through the Ministerial Council of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (MCATSIA) and Standing Committee for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (SCATSIA), and sought to ‘provide clarity on current areas of interaction and barriers that may exist for local government engagement, identifying possible areas of work to maximise opportunities to better harness the strengths of local government networks’.

Following the dissemination of the discussion paper, the toolkit and additional materials were uploaded onto the Department of Local Government’s website in April 2010 and placed within the ‘Workforce Planning — Useful links and resources’ web page. This web page compiles existing resources into a single location and, at the time of writing, includes:

• the ‘Engaging with Aboriginal Communities’ toolkit (discussed below);

• an Aboriginal Employment Strategy Template;

• links to NSW and Commonwealth programs, including MIOB, the Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program (EDAEP), the Australian Government Indigenous Employment Program, and the Indigenous Youth Mobility Program; and

• a link to information about Reconciliation Action Plans (Division of Local Government 2011; Department of Local Government NSW 2007).

Funding and costs

The AANSW program manager indicated that the initiatives do not receive any direct funding under the NAEP. However, as for the APIC and APIP Guidelines, AANSW is utilising existing resources to undertake the project.


Due to the recent commencement of this initiative, data on employment opportunities created or retention rates is not available. According to the AANSW program manager, the program will be evaluated and extent and type of data collection is to be discussed at working group meetings.




As the initiatives have not been developed at the time of writing, no data are available regarding the implementation of initiatives by local governments, nor about any subsequent impacts upon the employment of Aboriginal people in local governments.

However, during consultations it was stated that the initiatives will be evaluated. It was also mentioned that data will be collected regarding the experiences of local governments in implementing Aboriginal employment initiatives.

2.7 Aboriginal Communities Development Program (ACDP)

Duration Program rationale Costs and funding Outputs and outcomes

1998 to 2011

Create opportunities for Aboriginal people to obtain a building trade qualification and to encourage economic development through the establishment of Aboriginal building companies.

$240m for entire program; approximately $9m for education and training element.

• Training: 230 individuals enrolled in formal training programs, 63 completed apprenticeships

• Economic development: Aboriginal building companies were established in 15 locations, two companies are currently operational.

Description

The Aboriginal Communities Development Program (ACDP) funded the development and repair of housing and infrastructure in 22 Aboriginal communities across NSW. According to the program manager, the employment and training component of the ACDP, which was implemented in 15 of these communities, sought to assist Aboriginal community members to obtain a formal building qualification. Additionally, economic development was encouraged through the formation of Aboriginal building companies (ABCs) to undertake the construction and maintenance work mandated by the program. According to Robyn Kennedy Consultants (2011), 18 ABCs were created between 1998 and 2011.

The program’s model called for community members to enrol in a trade certificate at a TAFE institution where they would complete their relevant coursework. It was envisioned that they would be able to complete their workplace competencies by participating in ACDP projects.

Apprentices were employed by ABCs, who also provided the supervision and training required for the attainment of workplace competencies. Participants in the program were expected to complete the training program within four years.

Duration

The program has expired; it commenced in 1998 and was completed in 2011, with administrative items being finalised (as of September 2011).

Program rationale

The program sought to create opportunities for Aboriginal people to obtain a building trade qualification and to encourage economic development through the establishment of Aboriginal building companies.



Funding and costs

The NSW Government committed $240 million for the entire ACDP project over the 13-year timeframe. According to the program manager, there is limited information that indicates the cost of the employment and training sub-program to the NSW Government.

From the information that was provided by the program manager it was determined that each trainee incurred expenses of $20,000 per annum. Of that figure, $10,000 was provided by TAFE NSW through a fee waiver and an additional $10,000 was provided by DEEWR for expenses incurred during training, for example, related to equipment, accommodation and transport. Furthermore, according to the program manager, training participants were also eligible for two days of Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) work per week, funded through FaHCSIA. The program manager estimated that the sub-program cost the NSW Government approximately $8.7 million, however, it is not possible to verify this figure as part of this review.

An attempt was made to estimate the cost of the project based upon information provided in consultations. The estimate and rationale is depicted in Table 2.2, with the estimate of $10,360,000 being subject to several caveats. Firstly, it only estimates the funding provided by TAFE NSW and DEEWR. Data on additional funding provided by FaHCSIA and AANSW were not available. Secondly, it was not possible with the data provided to verify the enrolment dates of participants for each year. In order to estimate the number of participants who completed each year of training, completion of craft for Certificate II or ‘cancelled/withdrawn/ expired/transferred’ was assumed to have taken one year; completion of proficiency of Certificate II was assumed to have taken two years; completion of craft for Certificate III, three years; and completion of proficiency of Certificate III was assumed to have taken four years.

Table 2.2

ESTIMATED COSTS OF SELECTED PARTS OF THE ACDP TRAINING SUB-PROGRAM

Year of training

Participants engaged with the program in

each year

Participants that left the program in each

year

Estimated cost per annum

1 230 97 $4,600,000

2 133 41 $2,660,000

3 92 29 $1,840,000

4 63 63 $1,260,000

Total - 230 $10,360,000

Source: Allen Consulting Group (2011); Robyn Kennedy Consultants (2011).





The two principal outcomes of this program were the percentage of trainees that completed an apprenticeship, and the number of jobs created through the establishment of ABCs. As depicted in Table 2.2, of the 230 individuals who commenced an apprenticeship, 63 completed the required competencies. The percentage of trainees that completed apprenticeships is depicted in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1 TRAINING COMPLETION RATES FOR ACDP PARTICIPANTS

Note: Non-completion rates include all of the trainees that did not complete their apprenticeship (i.e. did not achieve a Certificate III). ‘Other’ includes all non-building related apprenticeships.

Source: Robyn Kennedy Consultants (2011); Allen Consulting Group (2011).

A 2011 evaluation of the ACDP program suggests that, in addition to the apprenticeships, several hundred short- to medium-term jobs were created throughout the life of the program (Robyn Kennedy Consultants 2011). No mention is made of the length of engagement in these roles or if any skills were transferred.

Retention rates

No information is available on the current employment status of those individuals who completed training through ACDP. Additionally, no further information is available on the status of individuals previously employed in ABCs.


Beyond consultation with the current program manager, reliance on a secondary source for data limits the confidence with which the factors for, or barriers to, success of this program can be analysed. The lack of data means it is difficult to demonstrate the extent to which the program has been successful in increasing Aboriginal employment.

A 2011 evaluation presented the 27.4 per cent completion of apprenticeships as a positive indicator of success (Robyn Kennedy Consultants 2011). However, in the absence of an established target, it is arguable whether the program has successfully met its objectives in relation to both equipping Aboriginal people with formal training qualifications and in assisting in the development of nascent industry in the form of ABCs.



According to stakeholders consulted, the employment and training sub-program was not initially a core objective of the ACDP. This initiative was added after targeted communities were identified. This may account for the inclusion of some communities where access to training was previously hindered by their remoteness.

It is the view of the program manager that the context in which the program was designed created a series of issues that hindered its success.

• The program primarily supported training that would assist in the completion of ACDP-related projects, principally carpentry and joinery. The ACDP created a short-term increase in the demand for carpentry skills in remote communities, significantly distorting the demand for these skills. With the completion of the ACDP program and the removal of opportunities for these trades there is now likely to be a surplus of individuals with these skills in some remote communities.

• Thirty per cent of participants did not complete any competency component of their training. The recent evaluation posits several factors that may have contributed to this high withdrawal rate, including the distance required to travel to complete TAFE training; lack of literacy and numeracy skills; and a preference for on-the-job training.

• In some communities individuals were unable to complete their practical training because there was not enough building work for apprentices to fulfil their competencies before funding ceased. This might indicate that inadequate budgeting and approval processes were used to reconcile the remaining budget with the training period; and

• The inconsistent duration of building projects in some communities may have led to some individuals discontinuing their training.

Sustainability of the ABC model appears to have not been adequately considered in the program design. According to the program manager only two Aboriginal building companies remained in operation as of July 2011. During the period that the ACDP sub-program was operational, five ABCs failed and were replaced with other ABCs. Reasons provided by the program manager and Robyn Kennedy Consultants (2011) for the high business failure rate include:

• potentially unrealistic expectations about the long-term viability of ABC’s in remote communities, where there are only limited opportunities for building and maintenance work beyond that tendered through initiatives like the ACDP and CDEP, combined with a potentially limited capacity or willingness to bid for work offered outside the ACDP program.

• a missed opportunity to build capacity in the ABCs over the 13-year duration of the program, particularly as it was suggested that the existence of limited business management skills among managers of the companies was a major contributor to business failure when the program was completed; and

• a lack of necessary skills of community working party members to fulfil their role in selecting and advising the management of ABCs.



2.8 Economic Development Officer (EDO) Network


February 2010 to June 2012

• NSW State Plan (supported by the Aboriginal Affairs Plan, and Two Ways Together)

• National Indigenous Reform Agreement, Closing the Gap

• low proportion of Aboriginal businesses, and lack of business skills among Aboriginal people

• entrenched social and economic disadvantage

$2.9m dollars for entire duration.

To date (as of 20 June 2011): • 61 workshops/training sessions

attended by 1010 people • 78 new businesses established,

315 assisted • 158 referred to financial and other

support • 242 provided with mentoring and

support • 145 jobs created

Description

The Economic Development Officer (EDO) Network is jointly administered by AANSW and the Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services NSW (DTIRIS), and is designed to provide business advice and support for small businesses in select locations, with a focus on promoting self-employment. The AANSW program manager indicated that six EDOs are placed within AANSW and four within DTIRIS (including one within the Department’s tourism division). The EDOs are jointly managed by regional managers in each of these NSW Departments and jointly attend EDO Network forums. The AANSW program manager noted that it was intended that EDO officers would provide support for the Job Compacts initiative and also work together with other programs, including the Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officer Program (see Section 2.14) and the Aboriginal Business Development Program (discussed in Section 2.9).

Duration

According to the AANSW program manager, the EDO Network had a staggered commencement from 1 February 2010 with officers hired on a 12-month contract, with the option of extension for an additional 12 months. Funding is expected to conclude in June 2012, however, the program manager stated that AANSW and the DTIRIS are currently investigating options to continue funding either all or part of the program.

Program rationale

An internal AANSW document lists a range of drivers for establishing the EDO Network, including the NSW State Plan and underlying policies such as the Aboriginal Affairs Plan and Two Ways Together; and targets under Closing the Gap. The document also lists a range of economic and social outcomes as motives behind the EDO Network. It cites statistics about Aboriginal economic disadvantage, including the low percentage of Aboriginal business owners and low labour market participation rates, as well as factors including ‘entrenched poverty and social alienation’ among Aboriginal communities. These issues, as well as ‘a lack of basic business knowledge, financial skills and poor strategic management in many Aboriginal enterprises’ were considered to be best addressed through the provision of business training and support to generate sustainable Aboriginal businesses.



Funding and costs

The EDO Network is jointly funded by DEEWR and the NSW Government. Data provided by the AANSW program manager indicate that, for its entire two-year duration, the program is to receive:

• $2 million from DEEWR for salaries and on-costs; and

• $910,000 from the NSW Government for non-salary on-costs.

As mentioned above, funding is expected to conclude in June 2012, however, alternative funding sources are being investigated.


Key performance data are submitted by EDOs to the AANSW program manager on a monthly basis as per DEEWR’s reporting requirements. The AANSW program manager communicated an intention to add additional KPIs to improve this data collection should the EDO Network continue past June 2012.

Data provided until June 2011 indicate that the program — at the time three-quarters of the way through its duration — has in some cases exceeded its performance targets (targets for the whole of two-year program are presented in parentheses below).

Business development activities undertaken

The data indicate that between February 2010 and June 2011, there have been:

• 61 business workshops, training courses, seminars and information sessions facilitated (target of 80); these were attended by 1010 Indigenous people (target of 200);

• 78 new Indigenous-owned and operated businesses established (target of 40), and 315 businesses assisted (target of 320);

• 158 clients referred to access financial and other support (target of 320); and

• 242 clients provided with support including mentoring and referrals (target of 320).


Between February 2010 and June 2011, 145 jobs have been created (target of 200).

According to the AANSW program manager, the availability of employment data depends upon information provided by clients, particularly as the EDOs’ core activity is to assist business. The AANSW program manager indicated that EDOs do not regularly follow up clients to measure changes in their employment, particularly given the large number of businesses assisted (315 businesses representing an average of 30 per EDO).

Retention rates

No data on retention rates are available at the time of writing.



No formal evaluation of the EDO Network is planned, however, a number of case studies are prepared each month to illustrate the program’s successes. The case studies provided by the AANSW program manager describe clients’ overall satisfaction with the services and expertise provided by EDOs. Assistance provided to clients is listed in Box 2.2.

Box 2.2

EXTRACTS FROM CASE STUDIES REGARDING ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY EDO NETWORK OFFICERS

According to the case studies, assistance provided by EDOs includes: • undertaking feasibility studies, engaging architects and heritage specialists, and

mentoring and workshops for an Aboriginal Cultural Centre; • helping a plumbing, roofing and gas fitting business to apply for an Australian

Business Number and business support; identifying ways to reduce marketing and IT costs; and identifying marketing options;

• developing a business plan and organising meetings with stakeholders and funding agencies for an organisation seeking to engage with Defence industry contractors; and

• working in collaboration with Indigenous Business Australia to assist an existing business to expand into tourism, including the engagement of a business consultant to develop a business plan and mentor company directors, providing assistance to obtain finance for a website and ecommerce facility, and recommending a women’s business network to enhance directors’ management skills.

Source: Unpublished information provided by AANSW (2011).

The AANSW program manager also noted that an evaluation form has been developed by an EDO for client evaluation of workshops. However, these forms are not necessarily used by all EDOs, thus there is no single data collection mechanism to evaluate all workshops.

Success factors

During consultations, the DTIRIS program manager indicated that the existence of EDOs freed up ABDP resources. New clients were allocated to the nearest Aboriginal Business Development Manager (ABDM) or EDO so that no client or regional overlaps arose, reportedly enabling the ABDP to engage with at least 32 new clients since the EDO program began.

Service delivery is also assisted by close collaboration between the ABDP and EDO programs, stemming from their joint management and the good personal relationships between the DTIRIS and AANSW program managers.

Another positive factor cited by the DTIRIS and AANSW program managers is the grassroots approach taken, with program officers engaging in one-on-one consultations with clients. This reportedly improves the responsiveness of service delivery towards clients’ exact needs, and involves considerable network and relationship building. The AANSW program manager stated that EDOs spent a considerable amount of their first year establishing local relationships and networks, and that they achieved significant outreach in finding 315 new clients.



Barriers to success

The STS program manager raised concerns that the work of EDOs overlaps significantly with work undertaken in the AEDO program and the ABDP. However, the AANSW program manager outlined attempts to avoid geographic overlaps in the location of EDOs, stating that a workshop had been held for all EDOs, AEDOs and ABDMs specifically for this purpose. The DTIRIS program manager noted that, while the Commonwealth determined the location of EDOs, the ABDMs operate in clearly delineated areas and with specific clients. She also stated that regular discussions take place between EDOs and ABDMs to prevent overlaps from occurring.

Moreover, the AANSW program manager indicated that there are differences in the work undertaken by ABDMs and EDOs, with ABDMs generally being more experienced, having a greater regional coverage than EDOs, playing a more strategic role, and taking on large projects outside the scope of EDOs. However, this information nonetheless suggests that the functions and locations of the three programs may in fact overlap. Potential overlaps are explored further in Chapter 3.

Another potential barrier is the limited awareness in the population of the existence of the EDO Network and the services EDOs provide, as indicated in case studies provided by the AANSW program manager. This finding is supported by the difficulty in finding publicly available information about the EDO Network, EDOs themselves, and their roles.

Another issue raised was DEEWR’s recent decision not to renew funding for the EDO program. According to the AANSW and DTIRIS program managers it is now likely that, given the business expertise required for EDO positions, responsibility for clients of all ten EDOs will fall upon the three ABDMs, as they are part of the New South Wales Government’s business economic development agency. An exit plan is reportedly being developed by DTIRIS to maintain a level of service to EDO Network clients. However, this change may nonetheless have significant implications for the quality and quantity of service delivery and the relationships established with communities.

The AANSW program manager also considered that the funding modalities affected the pool of expertise that could be drawn on to fill EDO positions: despite a two-year funding commitment, DEEWR funding was reportedly offered on a year-by-year basis. This meant that jobs could only be advertised for one year, and people were hesitant to leave their positions for this job, especially as the positions were advertised during the global financial crisis. The AANSW program manager believed that longer-term funding guarantees could have improved the quality of candidates available.

Another barrier to success identified by the STS program manager is that, unlike the AEDOs and ABDMs, EDOs are not identified positions, which may lead to cultural awareness issues and affect the willingness of Aboriginal people to engage with EDOs.



2.9 Aboriginal Business Development Program (ABDP)


1998 to current • Feedback from Aboriginal people

• High small business exit rates

• Entrenched social and economic disadvantage

Funding: • 2008-09: $500,000 • 2009-10: $400,000 • 2010-11: $400,000 • 2011-12: $450,000 The ABDP also has access to mainstream DTIRIS budget and programs

• Overall highly satisfied response from 27 respondents to client survey

• Positive client feedback about business support and trade show outcomes

• Predominantly ‘very useful’ workshops (Note: not all workshops participants responded)

Description

The Aboriginal Business Development Program (ABDP) is run by DTIRIS. The ABDP provides a range of assistance to Aboriginal people to develop and strengthen their small businesses, primarily by engaging business specialists. Services include:

• access to business guidance within DTIRIS;

• access to specialised business advice from external business consultants;

• financial assistance to support Aboriginal businesses develop growth plans, get over a business hurdle, and participate in industry trade shows;

• the conduct of workshops, seminars and networking opportunities; and

• facilitation of training for business owners (DTIRIS 2011a).

Financial support is also provided for businesses that have successfully operated for at least two years. Although the program’s website specifies maximum amounts of funding ($5,000 for business consultants, $3,000 export assistance, $3,000 assistance to participate in an industry trade show) (DTIRIS 2011a), the DTIRIS program manager indicated that this information will be removed from the website, and that support will not usually exceed $4,000. In any case, these are not strict limits as financial support is reportedly determined on a case-by-case basis.

According to the DTIRIS program manager, applicants must provide a strong business case in order to receive funding, and applicants have been refused financial support where the Aboriginal Business Development Manager (ABDM) assessing their application does not see value in proposals. ABDMs undertake analysis to obtain a ‘snapshot’ of the business in order to evaluate applications and guide any assistance provided. Unsuccessful applicants are encouraged to pursue other support, such as attendance at workshops and the investigation of mainstream support options within DTIRIS.

Other initiatives of the ABDP include:

• creating a Guide to Developing an Aboriginal Business;

• partially funding a position in the Industry Capability Unit — to provide assistance for procurement from Aboriginal businesses;



• partially funding the Aboriginal Minority Supplier Council (AIMC); and

• establishing the Aboriginal Business Directory — an online database assisting in the establishment of links to Aboriginal businesses.

The services are provided by three ABDMs located in Lismore, Dubbo and Parramatta, and the program manager based in the Sydney CBD (DTIRIS 2011b). The DTIRIS program manager noted that all ABDMs are identified positions, and reported that ABDP staff significantly collaborate with EDO Network staff, particularly due to the DTIRIS’s co-management of the EDO Network. Other reported instances of collaboration include the program’s use of other resources within the DTIRIS, and engagement with Commonwealth agencies including Indigenous Business Australia and DEEWR. However, the available data do not enable independent verification of the nature and extent of such collaboration.

Duration

Information provided by the DTIRIS program manager indicates that the program commenced in 1998 with a single service, and has since expanded to offer the range of services listed above.

Program rationale

In 1998, DTIRIS offered a single program assisting Aboriginal people to attend trade shows. A review of this program was conducted but was not able to be located for this review. The program manager, however, believes that the continuation and extension of the program in 2001 (at which time a senior manager and two additional ABDMs were appointed) suggest that the review revealed a positive picture of the program.

Furthermore, the program manager noted that program expansion has predominantly been guided by perceived gaps in service delivery based on client feedback and DTIRIS’s independent annual client survey (described below under ‘Outputs and Outcomes’). Program analyses and client feedback are reportedly considered during yearly meetings between all ABDP staff, during which service delivery strategies are assessed and altered in response to economic conditions. Frequent, mostly informal feedback is enabled by the program’s on-the-ground nature and the reportedly close relationships between ABDMs and their clients. The program manager cited examples of such feedback, including clients who received business diagnostics raising concerns about their inability to implement recommendations without further support.

The DTIRIS program manager considers that such feedback and staff perceptions drive the program’s development and evolution. A number of new services were established from 2001 onwards, including mentoring, business clusters and a youth program, and in 2009 these were consolidated into a single Aboriginal Business Development Program offering a range of services tailored to the needs of each client.



Additional rationale for the program is contained in an internal document provided by DTIRIS. However it must be noted that this document has been prepared recently, and the extent to which similar information was considered before the program’s commencement is unclear. The document cites specific rationale for the program to include high exit rates for small businesses in general (14.6 per cent in 2006–07, according to ABS data), and states that difficulties for Aboriginal businesses are compounded by ‘entrenched social and economic disadvantage’.

Funding and costs

The ABDP is funded by the NSW Government. It received $500,000 funding in 2008-09, $400,000 per annum from 2009 to 2011, and $450,000 in 2011-12. According to the DTIRIS program manager, the majority of funds are spent providing financial assistance. In total, $371,304 expenditure has been recorded in 2010-11, with the program manager indicating that the remainder of funds was spent on items including co-funding for the AIMC and projects that run into the next financial year. Table 2.3 outlines financial assistance and workshop expenditure, which was predominantly spent on services for business growth, marketing and special projects.

Table 2.3

FINANCIAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THE ABORIGINAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IN 2010-11

Support category Number of clients supported Value of support

Business Growth 38 $115,814

Marketing 22 $57,323

Special Projects 20 $40,769

Trade fairs/product consignments 15 $39,150

Website / E-Commerce 9 $31,240

Market Development 12 $26,254

Specialist/Technical consultancy 7 $18,938

Workshops* 9 $15,029

Fees — Training 1 $14,400

Network Development 1 $7,091

Community Based 4 $5,297

TOTAL 140 $371,304

* A total of 23 workshops were provided in the 2010-11 financial year, 14 of which were financed from mainstream DTIRIS funds. Source: Unpublished information provided by DTIRIS (2011).



The DTIRIS program manager indicated that, in addition to ABDP’s operating budget, program staff have access to funding and resources from other sections within DTIRIS. This additional funding is reportedly used to complement and supplement services provided by the ABDP, for example, running 14 workshops in addition to those listed in Table 2.3.


DTIRIS records data about program outputs and outcomes. Outputs collected by ABDMs are outlined below, while information about program outcomes is provided by:

• an annual survey of clients of the State & Regional Development and Tourism Division within DTIRIS;

• letters from clients regarding the completion of work;

• client questionnaires; and

• workshop evaluations.

The client survey is described in Box 2.3, while other sources of outcome data are described thereafter.

Box 2.3 STATE & REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM DIVISION CLIENT SURVEY 2009-10 — SURVEY AND SAMPLING

The annual client survey is conducted by an independent research agency, and in 2009-10 covered six client groups within the State & Regional Development and Tourism division of DTIRIS. Of the division’s 12,879 clients in 2009-10, details of 1,734 were provided to surveyors and 951 responded. Of the 1,308 clients of the Enterprise, Small Business and Regional Development unit (ESBRD), a unit within the State & Regional Development and Tourism division of DTIRIS, details of 915 were made available and 499 responded — a response rate of 55 per cent. Of these, 27 were ABDP clients, representing 34 per cent of the 79 ABDP clients over this period, and 41 per cent of the sample pool made available to surveyors. This relatively small number of ABDP respondents creates cause for caution in interpreting survey results. Care should also be taken due to self-selection issues that may arise generally in survey data. For example, survey results may be skewed by the reasons for which respondents agree to undertake the survey, including desires to indicate particular satisfaction or dissatisfaction, or by location/ease of contacting particular persons.

Source: DTIRIS (2011c).

Business opportunities created

Data are collected describing the number and value of services provided to clients. According to data provided by the program manager, in 2010-11 this included:

• providing assistance to 295 clients, predominantly small- to medium-sized enterprises; and

• running 23 workshops that were attended by over 370 participants.




In the 2009-10 client survey, the 27 ABDP survey respondents report an average two per cent fall in full-time employment from 2008-09 to 2009-10, and on average anticipate a 47 per cent increase in 2009-10 to 2010-11. However, such employment changes are likely to be affected by a myriad of factors, including general economic conditions, and therefore the ABDP’s individual impact cannot be identified.

Client outcomes — survey

The 2010-10 client survey presents some information about business growth outcomes, as well as feedback from clients about their satisfaction with the ABDP.

Business growth outcomes are listed below (DTIRIS 2011c), however, the extent to which these results stem from ABDP assistance as opposed to other influences cannot be ascertained:

• 14 ABDP clients reported a 14 per cent ($50,000) average increase in sales between the 2008-09 and 2009-10 financial years; and

• 9 ABDP clients reported an average 34 per cent ($20,000) increase in export sales/sales from international tourists from 2009-09 to 2009-10.

Regarding client satisfaction with services, in 2009-10:

• 85 per cent of ABDP respondents reported being highly satisfied with the ABDP overall (compared to 67 per cent of ESBRD, under which the ABDP operates);

• 85 per cent were highly satisfied with knowledge and service of staff (68 per cent of ESBRD);

• 89 per cent were highly satisfied with usefulness of assistance (58 per cent of ESBRD); and

• 85 per cent would use the services again (70 per cent of ESBRD).

Additionally, when asked whether the service met their expectations in five criteria (reliability, responsiveness, quality of advice, competence, and consistency), ABDP clients indicated an average of 4.6 of these expectations were met (compared to 4.3 for the ESBRD), which rated among the higher end of the survey’s client groups.

However, care must be taken when interpreting these results due to the relatively small number of ABDP clients surveyed (n=27) and potential self-selection issues discussed in Box 2.3.

Client outcomes — letters and questionnaires

In addition to the survey, the DTIRIS program manager provided a sample of recently received letters and completed questionnaires from clients that include KPIs and feedback on business outcomes. This information is outlined below, however, it must be noted that data and samples provided do not represent all of the ABDP’s clients, do not deal with all the KPIs listed below, and do not enable independent evaluation of the program’s outcomes.

Data contained in letters from clients regarding the receipt of ABDP services contains pro-forma information, including KPIs. Specifically, these letters relate to:



• financial support for business consultants or export assistance — for which the pro-forma letter includes the following KPIs:

– percentage increases in sales, full-time employment, and business growth; and

– whether or not clients accessed new markets, improved business systems, overcame a business hurdle or improved their marketing;

• financial support to attend a trade show — the pro-forma letter includes a questionnaire asking for assessments and estimates of the actual and potential sales value from the trade show, and the potential value of industry contacts made during the show.

In two letters notifying the ABDP about the provision of business consultancy services, clients note that business support has helped them to achieve the following KPIs: ‘improved business systems’; ‘overcome a business hurdle’; and ‘accessed new markets’. Four letters regarding trade shows attended in August and September 2011 indicate that ABDP clients experience a low value of actual sales during the shows (all under $3,000), however, the potential sales estimates vary and depend on following up with contacts and connections made (two citing less than $3,000, and two citing more than $30,000). The DTIRIS program manager explained that the variation in future sales may arise because outcomes from trade shows may take six or more months to manifest.

Of the nine questionnaires provided, all state that assistance from DTIRIS has been helpful. Specific responses are listed in Box 2.4. Qualitative responses indicate that clients are highly satisfied with the guidance provided by ABDMs, particularly noting their business expertise, cultural knowledge, and well as the provision of networking and mentoring opportunities. Clients also indicate preferences for more consistent funding and services from the same consultants, and one desires greater face-to-face communication with ABDMs.



Box 2.4 CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK ON ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY THE ABDP

Clients have indicated that assistance from DTIRIS has helped them by: • assisting clients to invest in marketing or development projects that would have been

impossible for them to fund on their own; • providing financial assistance to help clients solve a major business hurdle; • assisting clients to participate in trade shows or events; • providing clients with crucial information; • enabling clients to connect with other services and businesses that have been

helpful; • helping clients to negotiate with contractors/suppliers/partners; • helping clients to gain finance to secure business start up or growth; • providing training and workshops that have increased the clients’ skill base; and • providing mentoring and business skills capacity development. Clients responding to the questionnaire have also indicated that the assistance from DTIRIS has helped them to achieve outcomes, including to: • increase sales; • obtain forward contracts; • increase training and business awareness/capacity; • improve business systems; • improve marketing and consumer interest; and • develop a professional image.

Source: Unpublished information provided by DTIRIS.

However, neither the data provided in questionnaires nor the letters are collated or aggregated, limiting their use for evaluation purposes. Furthermore, the DTIRIS program manager cited challenges in obtaining such KPI figures from clients, especially where they find it difficult to measure financial outcomes. However, in response to an internal audit in 2011, there are plans to develop a more useable KPI reporting mechanism for clients to report on the usefulness of the program’s assistance.

Client outcomes — workshop evaluations

Another source of evaluation data is contained in information collected from workshop participants providing evaluations of workshops they have attended. According to these data, 90 per cent of respondents found workshops to be ‘Very useful’ and 10 per cent found them to be ‘Useful’. No participant stated that a workshop was ‘Not Useful’. However, these figures are to be interpreted with caution as not all workshops participants completed an evaluation. Furthermore, it appears that some workshops performed better than others, which may skew the responses given varying workshop attendance.



Success factors

It is difficult to gauge the effectiveness of the ABDP without comprehensive data covering all clients. However, the generally positive outcomes of the client survey, pro-forma letters and workshop evaluations, and the demand for services over 13 years suggest that the program is benefitting its clients. KPI data are being consolidated following an internal audit, which will enable a more rigorous evaluation of program effectiveness.

During consultations, the DTIRIS program manager cited a number of factors that made the program successful. One is the market-responsive and tailored nature of the services. The program manager believes that the single, flexible program enables the provision of services most required by the client.

The program manager also believes that the program’s personal and grassroots approach is beneficial, particularly as ABDMs are in identified positions and work closely with clients. In the program manager’s opinion, this fosters relationships that enable a greater understanding of client’s needs and more appropriate service delivery.

Although the duplication of clients and service delivery has been raised by a number of program managers, the DTIRIS program manager considers collaboration among programs to be a factor in the ABDP’s success (particularly where program staff have good personal relationships). Steps taken to avoid duplication reportedly include managing the allocation of clients across to their nearest ABDM or EDO. The STS program manager, however, believes that these two programs significantly overlap with AEDOs (further discussed in Chapter 3). The DTIRIS program manager also cites collaboration with other agencies, such as DEEWR and Indigenous Business Australia, as a mechanism to avoid duplication and to enhance the range of services available.

Another positive factor, according to the DTIRIS program manager, is the less onerous eligibility criteria for access to ABDP assistance compared to DTIRIS’s general services. To enhance the cash flow and improve accessibility to ABDP services by Aboriginal clients, several restrictions have been removed, including the requirement to meet a minimum turnover threshold and restrictions on eligible industry sectors. However, the program manager has indicated that where Aboriginal clients are eligible for mainstream DTIRIS assistance they are encouraged to pursue these options as well.

The DTIRIS program manager also cites benefits from the positioning of the ABDP within DTIRIS. This reportedly enables ABDP staff to access expert advice from other units within the Department, leveraging the ABDP to access wider resources.

Barriers to success

Key barriers to the program’s effectiveness stem from regional and functional overlaps between the ABDMs, the EDOs and AEDOs. The DTIRIS program manager believes that although ABDMs and EDOs work collaboratively, collaboration can be improved between ABDMs and AEDOs in order to improve client service and reduce client duplication. The extent of potential overlaps is discussed further in Chapter 3.



The DTIRIS program manager also notes the program should be better marketed. ‘Word of mouth’ is the main form of advertising, occasionally complemented by notices in the Koori mail and talks on Koori radio. Additionally, the program manager had been asked to present a monthly radio segment, which suggests the existence of broad demand for business advice. The offer was unable to be accepted due to time pressures. Further, the DTIRIS program manager indicated that with the limited budget available, increased marketing may bring unmanageable demand.

Another issue raised by the DTIRIS program manager is the need for high levels of personal commitment by all involved in supporting Aboriginal economic development.

2.10 Making It Our Business (MIOB)

Duration Program rationale Costs/Funding Outputs/Outcomes

2006 to current Improve recruitment, retention and career development for Aboriginal employees in the NSW public sector


Program success is determined by an increase in the aggregate percentage of Aboriginal employment in the NSW public sector

Description

Making It Our Business (MIOB) is a NSW Government employment strategy that seeks to improve Aboriginal employment in the NSW public sector by addressing issues of recruitment, retention, and career development. In contrast to the majority of initiatives this review is considering, the MIOB program is a policy framework and action plan, as opposed to a specific program. MIOB outlines specific targets, timeframes and accountabilities for NSW agencies.

According to DPC representatives consulted during this review, MIOB seeks to improve the recruitment experience for Aboriginal candidates. An underlying assumption of the initiative is that public sector jobs need to be marketed better to Aboriginal people. Accordingly, the strategies recommended by the MIOB include providing better information, advice and support to applicants, engaging the community and working with schools and TAFE in areas with high Aboriginal populations to promote skills development and public sector career opportunities.

The action plan is central to the Government’s commitment to increase overall Aboriginal employment to 2.6 per cent of the total NSW public sector. In order to reach this target, between 2009 and 2012 an additional 2,229 Aboriginal people need to be employed.

Duration

The current MIOB action plan (2009-12) updates and builds on the strategic framework and resource guide (2006-08) that was launched in 2006. According to DPC staff, the implementation of the action plan is currently behind schedule because approval by the former NSW Premier was only received in late 2009.

Program rationale

MIOB forms part of the NSW Government’s strategy to meet its targets under the NPA IEP.



Funding and costs

There is no specified budget for the program. Agencies are required to fund activities in the action plan through their current budgets. DPC indicated that it had expended over $171,405 to develop a range of guides and resources to support agencies in the implementation of the action plan. The total cost of activities associated with the implementation of this policy over the five years is not known.


The MIOB provides a high-level policy framework for increasing Aboriginal participation in employment in the NSW public sector. The absence of a counterfactual scenario makes it impossible to attribute any changes in Aboriginal employment or retention rates directly to the MIOB.

DPC collect a range of information on Aboriginal employment in the NSW public sector. While this information cannot determine the specific impact of the MIOB framework, it does highlight the differences that currently exist in employment outcomes between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal employees. According to DPC, care should be taken in interpreting the variation between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal results because of the difference in the size of the representative populations. The key trends from the information provided have been summarised in Box 2.5 below.


As indicated above, it is not possible to determine a causal link between improvements in Aboriginal employment outcomes and the MIOB.

Notwithstanding this fact, concerns as to the success of the initiative may arise from the design and rationale of the MIOB framework. With the MIOB being a top-down employment framework, there is a potential risk that the demand for Aboriginal employees in the NSW public sector is not matched by equal supply of qualified applicants. In particular, some levels and positions seem to be more difficult to staff, such as at Senior Executive Service (SES) level.

Public sector agencies are required to report on their progress towards meeting the targeted Aboriginal employment outcomes in both their annual reports and directly to the Public Sector Workforce Unit in DPC at six-month intervals. In consultations, representatives from DPC noted that most agencies report this data, however, they also stated that there is no uniform reporting requirement, nor penalties for failing to report this information.



Box 2.5 ABORIGINAL EMPLOYMENT IN THE NSW PUBLIC SECTOR 2005-2010

DPC collects two forms of data on Aboriginal employment in the NSW public sector. The first reports a raw 'headcount' of self-identified Aboriginal employees, whereas the second has been weighted to account for the underreporting of Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) data by employees. Where weighted data was not readily available, the raw ʻheadcountʼ data is presented in this box; it should be interpreted with caution. The weighted data provided by DPC suggest that there is a positive trend in the percentage of employees that identify as Aboriginal in the NSW public sector. This overall figure has increased from 1.9 per cent in 2005 to 2.5 per cent in 2010. Data provided suggest that there is a difference between the distribution of the tenure of employment between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in the NSW public sector. In 2010, 20.6 per cent of both Aboriginal people and non-Aboriginal people had been employed for between 10 and 20 years. However, there was a marked difference between the number of Aboriginal people employed for greater than 20 years: 9.3 per cent versus 18.6 per cent for non-Aboriginal people. The intervals at which the data have been provided do not allow for determination of the exact point at which this change occurs. The figure below depicts the length of employment for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal employees averaged for the period 2005-2010.

Distribution of tenure of employment in the NSW public sector (average 2005-2010)

Note: This data is unweighted and does not account for underreporting of EEO data.

Length of service of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal employees in the NSW public sector, per cent (2005-2010)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Length of Service

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

< 1 year 13.8 14.2 12.7 15.3 13.9 14.2 14.2 13.9 11.5 11.8 11.5 10.5

1-2 years 14.6 10.5 15.4 11.4 10.6 10.8 12.1 10.8 13.8 10.7 11.2 9.8

2-5 years 27.3 20.6 25.2 19.5 25.9 19.7 22.7 18.8 23.2 19.2 23.0 19.8

5-10 years 19.5 17.2 20.4 17.5 22.7 18.5 23.8 19.4 24.0 19.8 24.4 20.7

10-20 years 18.2 22.4 19.0 21.4 19.4 21.1 19.4 20.6 19.6 20.9 20.6 20.6

> 20 years 6.7 15.2 7.3 15.0 7.5 15.7 7.8 16.4 7.9 17.5 9.3 18.6


There was an observed variation in the salaries earned between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal employees. This inequality is recognised by the MIOB framework and is one of the outcomes it seeks to address.

< 1 year 1-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years >20 years0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percentage

Length of employment

Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal



In 2010, 36 per cent of Aboriginal people employed earned less than $50,100, compared to 24 per cent of non-Aboriginal people. The difference is partially explained by the number of traineeship positions created for Aboriginal people, a proportion of which may lead to permanent employment. The differences between employees earning between $50,100 and $91,653 was not as marked, with 57 per cent of Aboriginal and 61 per cent of non-Aboriginal people falling between this band. However, the percentage of non-Aboriginal people earning more than $91,653 (16 per cent) is double that of Aboriginal people (8 per cent).

Distribution on salaries earned by NSW public sector employees by Aboriginality in per cent (2005 and 2010)


As is indicated in the Table below, between 2005-2010 there was a small consistent increase in the percentage of Aboriginal employees in Grade 6-9, Grade 10-12 and Senior Officer grades.

Distribution on salaries earned by NSW public sector employees by Aboriginality in per cent (2005-2010)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Salary Scale

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Aboriginal

Non-A

boriginal

Gen. scale <2 years 3.8 2.1 3.5 2.3 5.8 3.3 6.1 3.2 6.5 3.2 6.9 3.2

Gen. scale 3-14 years 33.4 21.5 31.9 21.6 28.9 21.3 29.3 21.1 28.4 20.9 28.8 20.7

Grade 1-2 11.4 10.2 12.6 10.8 12.3 10.0 12.4 10.2 11.7 9.8 11.0 9.5

Grade 3-5 27.2 25.4 25.3 24.4 24.8 24.0 24.1 23.8 25.1 24.0 24.5 24.1

Grade 6-9 18.3 27.7 20.1 27.9 21.2 27.9 21.2 27.9 20.3 27.0 21.1 26.9

Grade 10-12 5.1 9.0 5.4 8.9 5.7 9.3 5.5 9.4 6.5 10.8 6.4 11.1

Senior Officer 0.7 3.4 1.0 3.2 1.1 3.3 1.2 3.3 1.3 3.4 1.1 3.5

SES 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.9 0.2 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.3 1.0 0.2 1.0


As depicted in the figures below, the percentage of public sector employees employed in permanent and non-permanent positions fluctuated between 2005-2010. During this period, Aboriginal permanent employment peaked at 84.0 per cent in 2006 and dropped to 81.3 per cent in 2008, before rising again in 2009 and 2010. During the same period, non-Aboriginal permanent employment has steadily decreased from 83.7 per cent (2005) to 81.5 per cent (2009). This decline is due in part to the ongoing ‘hiring freeze’ for most permanent positions in the NSW public sector. In 2010, there was a small difference between the percentage of Aboriginal (82.0 per cent) and non-Aboriginal (81.5 per cent) employees in permanent employment.

Generalscale

(<2 years)

Generalscale(3-14years)

Grade1 - 2

Grade3 - 5

Grade6 - 9

Grade10 - 12

SeniorOfficer

SeniorExecutiveService

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Percentage

Salary Band

Aboriginal 2005 2010 Non-Aboriginal 20102005



Percentage of employees in non-permanent positions Percentage of employees in permanent positions


Source: Allen Consulting Group, based on unpublished data provided by DPC (2011).

2.11 Aboriginal Training Coordinators


Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable

Aboriginal Training Coordinators (ATC) are not part of a specific program, rather they refer to a series of management positions within the State Training Services (STS).3 According to the STS program manager, there is currently sufficient funding for five full-time permanent targeted ATC positions in the New England, Illawarra, Western NSW and Western Sydney STS regional offices. Their roles and responsibilities include the management and administration of both Aboriginal and mainstream programs in their geographic region — including the NCAP, AEDO program, EDAEP and The Way Ahead initiatives. Additionally, their responsibilities involve liaising with STS stakeholders and providing advice to internal and external clients on Aboriginal training, employment and economic development strategies.

Due to ATCs being positions rather than a program and the fact that they do not have any specific outputs as part of their key performance indicators, it is inappropriate to attempt to evaluate their impact.

3 It is understood that this information has been communicated to AANSW in writing by STS.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 201015

16

17

18

19

Percentage

YearAboriginal Non-Aboriginal

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 201080

81

82

83

84

85

Percentage

Year

Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal



2.12 The Way Ahead for Aboriginal People


2004 to current

Original: • Not documented Current: • National Indigenous

Reform Agreement; National Integrated Strategy for Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage (COAG)

• $350,000/year in 2007-08 and 2010-11

Aboriginal apprentices mentored: • 2007-08: 173 • 2008-09: 203 • 2009-10: 236 • 2010-11: 298 Additional data indicates that 317 were mentored in 2010-11, possibly due to a continuation of mentoring from the previous year.

Description

The Way Ahead is a mentoring program for Aboriginal people undertaking apprenticeships and traineeships. The program seeks to prepare the trainee with structured support in order to maximise their chances of completing their training, leading to increased retention and completion rates. The support provided to protégés varies according to their needs, but the mentor’s role is to help them solve any potential problems before they escalate into employment-related issues that could negatively affect their chances of completing their training.

Duration

The Way Ahead was developed and initiated by the NSW Department of Education and Training New Apprenticeship Centres (DETNAC) in August 2004. In July 2007, operational and funding responsibility was transferred to State Training Services (STS), where it remains currently.

Program rationale

There is no information available that details the original rationale for the program. However, internal documents provided by the State Training Services indicates that The Way Ahead forms a mechanism through which the NSW Government aims to meet its targets under the NPA IEP.

Funding and costs

In the period between 2007-08 and 2010-11, the program had an annual budget of $350,000. STS took responsibility for the program’s management and financing in 2007.


According to the program manager, The Way Ahead has three specific outcome measures for Aboriginal people undertaking apprenticeships and traineeships:

• increase the annual retention rate amongst Aboriginal trainees;

• increase the number of individuals that complete their training course; and

• facilitate the growth of Aboriginal people undertaking this form of training.



These outcomes are achieved through the conduct of mentoring visits to Aboriginal people undertaking training. The number of mentoring referrals received by STS between 2007-08 and 2010-11 is depicted in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4

THE WAY AHEAD PROGRAM OUTPUTS (2007-08 TO 2010-11)

Output 2007-08* 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Total

Mentoring referrals 173 203 236 298 910

*Program commenced 1 July 2007, includes 3-month set-up stage.

Source: Unpublished information provided by STS (2011).

It is noted that additional data provided by the program manager show that in 2010-11, 317 apprentices received mentoring services, which greater than the number of referrals for the same period indicated in Table 2.4.

Furthermore, a 2011 evaluation found that between 2006-07 and 2009-10 226 Aboriginal people received mentoring through The Way Ahead (Powers 2011). These differences could be a result of protégés referred in previous years continuing to receive training.


The Way Ahead supports Aboriginal apprentices and trainees to complete their training, accordingly it is not appropriate to consider the commencement of an apprenticeship as the creation of an employment opportunity. Moreover, it is not possible to determine if the decision to enter an apprenticeship or traineeship was influenced by the existence of The Way Ahead, or to determine number the employment opportunities created by this program.

Retention rates

One of the primary outcomes of this program is to increase the retention and completion rates of Aboriginal people undertaking formal training. None of the three sources made available by the program manager4 provide complete data for the duration of the program. Also, the methodology and timeframe employed by each of the authors to determine the outputs of the program vary. Accordingly, the figures discussed below should be used with caution.

Data that compares the outcomes of the program for Aboriginal apprentices and trainees to their non-Aboriginal counterparts are only available for 2009, and are provided in Table 2.5.

4A 2011 qualitative evaluation by a consultant, Tony Powers and Associates; a 2009 report by the NSW Board

of Vocational Education and Training (BVET); and figures from the program’s database.



Table 2.5

SNAPSHOT OF THE WAY AHEAD PARTICIPANTS VERSUS OTHER APPRENTICES AND TRAINEES (2009)

Status The Way Ahead Participants Other apprentices and trainees

Per cent Number Per cent Number

In training 55.6% 35 49.0% 1570

Completed 14.3% 9 14.4% 463

Cancelled 30.2% 19 36.6% 1173

Total 100% 63 100% 3206

Note: percentages may not equal 100 due to rounding.

Source: Allen Consulting Group analysis; Tony Powers & Associates (2011).

A chi-square test was conducted to determine if the difference between the outcomes of The Way Ahead participants and the outcomes of ‘other apprentices and trainees’ is statistically significant. The difference between the two is not statistically significant (p=0.531). Accordingly, it is not possible to determine from the data provided if there is a statistically significant difference in the outcomes between Aboriginal people undertaking training with support form The Way Ahead and those not receiving support.

The BVET report noted that during the period between 2006-07 and 2008-09 the state-wide commencement of Aboriginal apprentices and trainees increased by 16.4 per cent and the retention rate increased by 30 per cent. However, it did not specifically provide any outcomes for The Way Ahead participants.

It cannot be concluded from the figures reported in the BVET report that The Way Ahead was solely responsible for these changes because it is not possible to determine if these changes were the result of mentoring or other external factors. Further, the report uses state level data, and does not establish a counterfactual that would allow us to distinguish between individuals that received mentoring and those that did not.

Success factors

According to a qualitative survey undertaken as part of the BVET (2009) report, the program has been well received by employers, trainees and mentors. However, data that have been collected throughout the period of the programs’ operational lifetime are limited, and do not allow a rigorous assessment of whether the program has been successful at achieving its stated objectives.

According to the program manager, anecdotal evidence suggests that the provision of early support to Aboriginal apprentices and trainees through mentoring increases their chances of being retained in or completing their training program. However, there are currently no resources available to measure and determine the exact impact of The Way Ahead on retention and completion rates.



Barriers to success

Several issues have been raised by both the program manager and Powers (2011). Both sources stressed that there is often a significant delay between an apprentice or trainee registering with their respective training providers and STS being informed of the interest of the prospective protégé in mentoring. Powers (2011) states that less than half of the referrals to the program occurred during the first three months of training, which presents a potential barrier to success. Powers (2001) notes that of the 223 protégés in his sample, 43 per cent had cancelled their training in the first three months.

Feedback from mentors, as reported by the program manager, suggests that mentors are not as effective if they are not able to engage with a protégé prior to or very near the commencement of the training course. This appears to be a significant barrier to success, as anecdotal evidence suggests that the mentoring program is more effective when it prepares trainees for the expectations of the work environment.

A second factor, reported by both the program manager and Powers (2011) is that only a very small number of Aboriginal trainees have access to the program. According to the program manager the program budget limits both the capacity and the geographic reach of the program.

The program manager noted that the resources allocated for supportive services for Aboriginal people undertaking training are insufficient to provide timely assistance for those that desire it. For example, in the 2010-11 financial year, $12.8 million was provided to fund 3,765 Aboriginal people commencing traineeships and apprenticeships in NSW, whereas only $350,000 was available to mentor and support 317 (8.4 per cent) of them.

It was also noted that there is no systematic selection process for prospective protégés. Powers (2011) notes that the current system ‘appears both inefficient and somewhat random’. As there is no method employed to screen prospective participants prior to their first mentoring visit, the first visit is often spent conducting a needs assessment. Powers found that in 29 per cent of cases, protégés only received one visit, as mentors noted they did not require further support.

The development of a framework and collection of data for an impact evaluation would assist in verifying, if not realising, the strong potential of this program.



2.13 New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP)

Duration Program rationale

Costs/Funding Outputs/Outcomes

1989 to current

Not documented $1,259,990 in 2010-11

In 2010-11: • 5,941 clients advised/assisted • 514 of these placed in employment • 544 of these commenced vocational education

and training

Description

The New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP) program funds a series of projects in partnership with selected NGOs to host and train NCAP officers. The role of an NCAP officer is to build and manage relationships with local Aboriginal jobseekers and employers in order to assist Aboriginal people to enter sustainable employment or training programs.

The host NGO provides the NCAP officer with managerial and corporate support and is responsible for a proportion of the cost of the project. The Department of Education and Communities (DEC) provides the NGO with funding to cover the salary and expenses of the NCAP officer. The NGO is awarded the contract to host an NCAP project for three years subject to annual review. An NGO can host more than one NCAP officer.

Duration

The program has been financed and managed by the NSW Government since 1989.

Program rationale

There is no information available that outlines the original rationale for the program. The program guidelines note that the NCAP program seeks to increase Aboriginal participation in the labour market by identifying, creating and supporting local sustainable, education, training, and employment opportunities.

Internal documents provided by the STS indicate that the NCAP program forms a mechanism through which the NSW Government aims to meet its targets under the NPA IEP.

Funding and costs

The NCAP program is financed by the DEC; its annual budget for the period between 2006-07 and 2010-11 is depicted in Table 2.6.

Table 2.6

ANNUAL BUDGET FOR NCAP PROGRAM (2006-07 TO 2010-11)

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

$565,075* $1,131,327 $1,149,077 $1,236,176 $1,259,990

*Data provided for this financial year is incomplete.





A summary of the NCAP programs outputs is provided in Table 2.7.

Table 2.7

NCAP PROGRAM OUTPUTS (2006-07 TO 2010-11)

Output 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Total

No. of projects* 13 12 12 13 13 63

No. of clients assisted N/A 2,139 2,069 N/A 3169 7,377

No. of employment placements**

651 654 585 381 512 2,783

No. of training placements*** 702 700 835 497 550 3,284

Note: *funding is available for 13 NCAP officers, in years with <13 projects more than one NCAP officer may be assigned to a project **placements are only counted if they are longer than 3 months ***includes both short courses and formal training.



As depicted in Table 2.7, the NCAP program has assisted 7,377 clients between 2006-07 and 2010-11. Of those clients that were assisted, 2,783 (37.7 per cent) were placed in jobs in which they were retained for at least three months. Additionally, 3,284 (44.5 per cent) of clients that were assisted were directed to, and completed, some form of training. There is no information available on what percentage of the training outcomes constituted the completion of formal training courses versus short or informal training courses. In addition to the figures reported above, thirteen Aboriginal people are employed as NCAP officers through this program.

Retention rates

As noted in Table 2.7, for an employment placement to be entered into the NCAP reporting system the individual needs to have been employed for at least three months. No further information on retention rates is collected or reported by STS.


According to the STS program manager, a positive factor is the relationship model that is utilised to assist clients. The relationship model used by NCAP officers leverages their relationships with both their Aboriginal clients and local prospective employees. Through these relationships, they are able to pair an Aboriginal client with a job that is more likely to match their skills and personal circumstances than other job placement models.

Additionally, the longevity of the program is considered to be important, as the relationships developed by the NCAP officer with the local Aboriginal community and local businesses have been built up and sustained over a long period of time. The program manager noted that this is of particular importance to Aboriginal people because of the significant number of short-term initiatives they are exposed to, which can cause disillusionment and confusion. In contrast, an NCAP officer can be readily identified as a contact for employment and training opportunities.



2.14 Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officer (AEDO) Program

Duration Program rationale

Costs and funding Outputs and outcomes

1990 to current

Not documented $691,517 in 2010-11

In 2010-11: • 994 provided with business support • 27 new Aboriginal businesses established

Description

The Aboriginal Enterprise Development Officer (AEDO) program assists Aboriginal people who are seeking to become self-employed. In a similar manner to the NCAP program, the AEDO program finances a series of projects in partnership with selected NGOs to host and train AEDOs. The role of an AEDO is to build and manage relationships with local Aboriginal people and to assist those who are seeking to become self-employed through the provision of business support services and training opportunities.

The host NGO provides the AEDO with managerial and corporate support and is responsible for a proportion of the cost of the project. DEC provides the NGO with funding to cover the salary and expenses of the AEDO. The NGO is awarded the contract to host an AEDO project for three years, subject to annual review.

Duration

The program has been financed and managed by the NSW State Government since 1990.

Program rationale

There is no information available that outlines the original rationale for the program. The program guidelines note that the program aims to increase the confidence and ability of Aboriginal people who wish to become self-employed.

Additionally, internal documents provided by the STS indicates that the NCAP program forms a mechanism through which the NSW Government aims to meet its targets under the NPA IEP.

Funding and costs

The AEDO program is financed by the DEC; its annual budget for the period between 2006-07 and 2010-11 is depicted in Table 2.8.

Table 2.8

ANNUAL BUDGET FOR THE AEDO PROGRAM (2006-07 TO 2010-11)

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

$656,889 $649,911 $700,221 $671,902 $691,517





A detailed summary of the AEDO program’s outputs is provided in Table 2.9.

Table 2.9

AEDO PROGRAM OUTPUTS (2006-07 TO 2010-11)

Output 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 Total

No. of projects 7 7 7 7 7 35

No. of clients assisted 664 796 597 1,098 995 4,150

No. of new clients assisted 76 96 119 193 163 647

No. of businesses created 16 30 26 23 27 122

No. of employment opportunities created* 16 55 45 31 26 173

No. of businesses dissuades 45 38 29 24 29 165

No. of training opportunities developed N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Note: *by businesses supported by this program



As is depicted in Table 2.9, the AEDO program has provided assistance to its Aboriginal clients in 4,150 cases between 2006-07 and 2010-11. During the same period it assisted with the establishment of 122 businesses that created an additional 173 employment opportunities.

Retention rates

The primary purpose of the AEDO program is to assist Aboriginal people seeking to establish a business in which they are self-employed. Rather than using retention rates as a measure of success, the success of the program would need to be measured by other indicators; an appropriate proxy measurement might be the period that a business remains operational for, however, information of this nature is not collected or reported by STS.

Success factors

The program manager considered the AEDO program’s longevity to be an asset, because Aboriginal communities are aware of the AEDOs existence and purpose. Additionally, AEDOs are able to leverage their knowledge of the community when determining an applicant’s suitability for assistance. Further, the reportedly close working relationship between NCAP officers and AEDOs allowed AEDOs to refer applicants to NCAP staff if they were not suitable applicants for assistance.

Barriers to success

The STS program manager identified a resourcing issue that could improve the effectiveness of the AEDO program, specifically the establishment of the EDO program with its parallel functions in the same geographic location where AEDOs already operate. The resources would have been more effective if they were either directed toward the creation of additional AEDO positions or these additional programs were centred on geographic locations where AEDOs did not operate.



2.15 Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program (EDAEP)

Duration Program rationale Funding/ Costs Outputs/Outcomes

1988 to current

Original: • Not documented Current: • National Integrated Strategy for

Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage Closing the Gap strategy (COAG); National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation (COAG)

• $1.9m in 2010-11 In 2010-11, the program funded: • 25 permanent positions • 9 temporary positions

(secondments) • 1 career development

(training) placement • 8 graduate positions • 5 community partnership

projects

Description

The Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program (EDAEP) is run by STS, and aims to increase the employment and advancement of Aboriginal people in the public service, and encourage innovative community projects (State Training Services 2011a).

In its present form, EDAEP encourages state and local governments to employ and skill Aboriginal people by subsidising or funding:

• permanent public sector positions;

• secondments to a higher public sector grade position for 12 months to build capacity;

• career development (such as workshops and training courses);

• community partnership projects run by NGOs and the Aboriginal sector that are innovative, and that train Aboriginal people at a local level; and

• graduate work experience for up to 12 weeks (State Training Services 2011a).

According to the program guidelines, EDAEP provides a 65 per cent salary contribution for permanent positions, secondments and graduate work experience; up to 50 per cent of funding for the total cost of career development activities; and up to $25,000 for community projects (State Training Services 2011b).

Consultations with the STS program manager, together with analysis of internal documentation, indicate that EDAEP funding is governed by established formal processes and guidelines. For example, in order to apply for funding, agencies are required to provide information such as duty statements, supervision and guidance arrangements, development and promotion pathways, and organisational structures, identifying positions to be created. Additionally, according to the STS program manager, performance targets are incorporated into funding contracts (STS 2011).

Duration

Documents provided by the STS indicate that the EDAEP originally commenced in 1988 as part of NSW Public Sector and Local Government Aboriginal Employment Strategies. These strategies were funded by the Commonwealth until 1996.



Following the cessation of Commonwealth funding, the NSW Government developed the Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment and Career Development Program and the Location Government Aboriginal Employment and Career Development Program. These two NSW programs were combined into the Elsa Dixon program in 2001.

Program rationale

The STS program manager was unable to provide information relating to the program’s original rationale, predominantly due to the EDAEP’s long-running nature. Current internal documents provided by the STS indicate that the program is currently considered to be a mechanism for meeting Aboriginal employment targets under the Closing the Gap strategy. During consultations, the STS program manager described the program’s particular relevance to the NPA IEP and the MIOB program, and mentioned that EDAEP is being actively promoted to help NSW Government agencies meet Aboriginal employment targets.

According to the program manager, program guidelines are reviewed annually, which suggests ongoing analysis of program design. A recently announced program element provides years 10 and 11 students with traineeships and assistance to obtain a post-secondary qualification following the successful completion of year 12 studies.

Funding and costs

The EDAEP is funded by the NSW Government. Table 2.10 contains funding data provided by the STS program manager, which indicates that funding has ranged from $1.3 million to over $1.9 million per annum over the past five financial years. According to the program manager, funding can fluctuate from year to year due to external economic conditions, and also as two other programs (New Careers for Aboriginal People (NCAP) and AEDO) draw on the same pool of funds.

According to the program manager, data on program costs is not readily available.

Table 2.10

ELSA DIXON ABORIGINAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM FUNDING 2006-07 TO 2010-11

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

$1,339,670 $1,858,322 $1,931,651 $1,961,137 $1,898,789




The EDAEP provides four types of employment opportunities: permanent positions; temporary positions (secondments); career development placements (training); and graduate positions. Table 2.11 lists the numbers of employment opportunities created between 2006-07 and 2010-11.



Table 2.11

NUMBER OF EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES CREATED BY THE ELSA DIXON ABORIGINAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM 2006-07 TO 2010-11

Employment opportunity

Year

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Permanent positions 35 39 15 9 25

Temporary positions 0 4 15 9 9

Career development 0 0 0 0 1

Graduate positions 0 0 0 8 8


Retention rates

The STS program manager indicated that STS is unable to collect data about employment outcomes, including retention rates, following participants’ completion of job and training placements. He stated that longitudinal data collection would be beneficial, but there was insufficient funding at present for this or other any program evaluations.

Additionally, data about program completion rates is not readily accessible, with the STS program manager noting that such information is held in project files and is not collated. He added that funding agreements require agencies to recruit another Aboriginal person ‘should a position become vacant during the funding period’.

However, the monitoring of job and training placements is considered to help ensure sustainable employment and training outcomes. Box 2.6 describes these monitoring processes.

The STS program manager also noted other ways through which the program attempts to ensure sustainable outcomes. These are to avoid ‘high risk’ agencies in favour of larger and more established organisations, and to require a significant amount of documentation for EDAEP applications.



Box 2.6 MONITORING PROCESSES FOR JOB AND TRAINING PLACEMENTS UNDERTAKEN IN THE ELSA DIXON ABORIGINAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM

Monitoring processes are outlined in the program guidelines, and require State Training Services to follow up on permanent employees and secondees at 6 months, and again after 12 months. Additionally, the guidelines mention that STS may contact employees who have completed carer development and graduate work experience ‘as part of the monitoring and evaluation process’. Funded organisations are monitored through: • visits to projects; • analysis of progress and financial reports provided by the funded organisation; • analysis of statistical reports; and • the request of any other information i.e. Annual Reports. Specific monitoring for career development funding arises through the provision of: an expenses summary; and an activity report from the employee stating outcomes, benefits of participating and the intended use of skills and information gained. Furthermore, employees undertaking career development or graduate work experience may be contacted directly for monitoring and evaluation purposes.

Source: STS (2011).

Community partnership projects created

Table 2.12 lists the number of community partnership projects funded by the EDAEP from 2006-07 to 2010-11.

Table 2.12

NUMBER OF COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS FUNDED BY THE ELSA DIXON ABORIGINAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM 2006-07 TO 2010-11

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

6 1 12 4 5


Similarly to employment outcomes, the STS program manager noted difficulties in obtaining the outcomes of community partnership projects. Although EDAEP Program Guidelines specify KPIs for community projects (including the numbers of Aboriginal people achieving full time employment, part time employment, commencing and completing training; and project benefits to local Aboriginal communities), the STS program manager mentioned an inability to obtain comparable KPI data due to varying project aims (STS 2011).

Success factors

The STS program manager considered it a strength that the Elsa Dixon program has been operating for over 22 years and that it is well known to NSW Government agencies.



Despite the lack of resources to enable long-term follow up of program participants, the STS program manager believed that the formal funding process and extent of documentation required from applicant agencies, together with goodwill in the desire to create such positions, engenders trust that the jobs and initiatives created are sustainable and will be continued after funding concludes.

Barriers to success

The STS program manager considered the inability to undertake longitudinal data collection an inhibitor to proper program evaluation as program outcomes, such as whether training assists participants to achieve career advancement.



Chapter 3

Collective review of impact, strengths, impediments and gaps

3.1 Describing the program landscape

The programs considered included in this review represent a diverse range of initiatives, diverse in terms of their scale, nature and objectives.

Some initiatives are strategic frameworks (such as MIOB), some are guidelines (for example, the APIC Guidelines), while others could be described as programs and services (such as the ABDP). Strategic frameworks and guidelines generally have no direct funding attached to them and set high-level goals and objectives. Programs, on the other hand, have a fixed timeframe and specific funding attached to them, and usually provide support and services on the ground.

According to program managers, some programs can be characterised as relationship programs, while others are funding programs. A relationship model involves program officers engaging one-on-one with program clients. For example, NCAP officers build relationships with Aboriginal jobseekers and assist them to achieve their desired employment outcomes. In contrast, a funding model involves the commitment of resources to finance a position in a specific organisation (e.g. EDAEP). The agency that finances the position has a limited ability to determine the content and outcomes of this role.

The initiatives under review are being overseen and managed by different departments, including AANSW; the Department of Premier and Cabinet; the Department of Trade and Investment; and the Department of Education and Communities (State Training Services);

In addition, the initiatives are at various stages of implementation, some at a draft stage where either the trial or the full roll-out and implementation have not yet started (e.g. APIP Guidelines), others at a trial stage (e.g. Aboriginal Jobs Together), some that are fully implemented and ongoing (e.g. New Carers for Aboriginal People), through to initiatives that are fully completed (e.g. ACDP) (see Figure 3.1).



Figure 3.1 OVERVIEW OF THE DURATION OF INITIATIVES

* The exact timeframe of the first trial is unknown.


Some initiatives are currently unfunded (e.g. Job Compacts), while others receive funding from the NSW Government only (e.g. ABDP) or a combination of state and Commonwealth funding (e.g. EDO Network).

Furthermore, the initiatives have different objectives and areas of focus (see Figure 3.2); some are predominantly Aboriginal business initiatives providing business advisory services; others are Aboriginal employment initiatives, focussing on job creation, either directly or indirectly, in different sectors (public, private, community); and again others could be described as education and training initiatives.



Figure 3.2 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND AREAS OF FOCUS

* not yet started; ** fully completed.


3.2 Assessing the suite of initiatives

The inventory of initiatives as described in Chapter 2 and Section 3.1 indicates how each is aimed at improving specific aspects of economic participation of Aboriginal people in NSW. This chapter considers how the suite of initiatives link and work together towards the overall objective of enhancing economic development and employment opportunities for Aboriginal people in NSW.

Combined impact

The diverse range, nature and timing of the initiatives make it difficult to provide an overall consolidated assessment of the impact of the programs as a whole. That is, it is not possible to assess, across the entirety of initiatives, how many jobs have been created for Aboriginal people in NSW, how long people remained in their respective jobs, how many businesses have been established and how long these businesses have been in operation.



It is also difficult to make definitive assessments of many of the individual initiatives. It is likely that some are more effective than others, but the limited evidence available restricts a rigorous analysis of such comparisons. This requires the availability of good baseline data as well as the establishment of monitoring of counterfactual situations.

Similarly, the absence of detailed cost data means that it is not possible to determine the comparative cost-effectiveness of initiatives. Such analysis would require data on clearly attributable outcomes and costs. With such data, the initiatives under review could be compared to either comparable initiatives undertaken in different contexts or jurisdictions (e.g. in a benchmark analysis) or between themselves. For example, the costs for creating jobs in one program could be compared with the costs incurred by another program, thus assessing whether a particular program represents good value for money.

Overall development

Rationale

The development of the Aboriginal economic development and employment programs appears to be opportunistic rather than coordinated. Based on the information available, it is difficult to identify a clear and consistent overarching framework that links the individual initiatives to clearly communicated needs of Aboriginal people, obvious gaps in service delivery, or overarching Commonwealth or state policy frameworks.

In the case of some programs, particularly those that have been in existence for a number of years, their rationale has been re-construed to align their contribution to achieving the Closing the Gap targets.

Consultation approach

It is not clear how many of the initiatives reviewed were developed in a top-down manner compared with those that are based on stakeholder input regarding needs and service gaps. Overall, however, it appears that the design and implementation of most of the initiatives under review has had little involvement of Aboriginal stakeholders by way of culturally appropriate consultation processes.

Evidence-base

It is difficult to ascertain the extent to which the design of current initiatives has taken into account lessons learned, including barriers and impediments for success, from either expired or other existing programs. Moreover, the general lack of outcome and impact evaluations suggests that few, if any, of the current initiatives have been developed based on formal evidence, such as from an evaluation of similar programs, that they will be able to produce the desired outcomes.

In many cases, no specific resources have been allocated to assess the outcomes and impact of programs through formal evaluation. Rather, resources appear to have been directed towards establishing new programs. An example is the decision to develop the ABDP and EDO programs without first a rigorous evaluation of the similar AEDO program.



In addition, it appears that none of the initiatives under review have had an outcome evaluation component built into their design and funding agreement. The evaluations are generally process as opposed to outcome evaluations. Limited program timeframes and funding have also not allowed for the collection of longitudinal data that would be necessary to establish program outcomes.

In almost all initiatives under review, the data collected by program managers focus on processes and outputs, such as the numbers of clients seen or the number of workshops held rather than data about the outcomes of programs, for instance, the number of trainees who completed their apprenticeship due to the mentoring provided. Without this type of information it is difficult to determine forward-looking conclusions, for example, the optimal time for starting as well as the duration of mentoring for a new trainee.

Program design and implementation

Breadth of focus

It is widely acknowledged that factors preventing Aboriginal people from engaging in mainstream employment and enterprise are a product of their individual, educational, social, geographic and historical circumstances. An effective policy response therefore needs to consider a holistic approach that takes into account the impact of external, circumstantial factors on employment outcomes.

However, it appears that most of the initiatives considered in this review have not been designed in this manner, and do not seek to address the core issues and circumstances underlying the relative disengagement of Aboriginal people from mainstream economic development in NSW.

Most initiatives are designed to deliver short-term interventions or achieve certain isolated outcomes rather than offering holistic and sustained support over a longer period of time.

Examples include initiatives with objectives to create a certain number of apprenticeships or employment opportunities for Aboriginal people, such as the ACDP, the Elsa Dixon and the Aboriginal Jobs Together programs. In many cases, once positions have been created, no further assistance is usually provided, such as to ensure that the apprentices complete their qualifications and are then offered a permanent job, or that a certain percentage of newly hired employees remain in their jobs for a certain period of time or even pursue a career by enabling them to be promoted into roles with increased responsibilities.

While the ACDP seeks to provide tangible skills to Aboriginal people in the communities it serves, the program’s outcomes have been hindered by both the limited support provided to the trainees it has sponsored and the few relevant employment opportunities available in graduates’ communities. More targeted and sustained support could have provided trainees with the skills needed to be competitive in the general labour market, which would allow them to find employment outside the scope of the program.



Examples of a longer-term approach are the NCAP and AEDO programs. These utilise a ‘relationship model’ to assist Aboriginal jobseekers throughout the recruitment process and beyond, from assisting with the identification of local labour market opportunities to providing advice and assistance on the completion of job applications and, where necessary, arranging training for jobseekers to improve their skills.

Issues in program objectives and service delivery

Demand/supply side balance

As demonstrated by Figure 3.2, most initiatives focus on the creation of employment opportunities for Aboriginal people. The number of programs focussing on education and training is very low in comparison. While creation of employment opportunities is an important objective, it is not sufficient to create the demand if, at the same time, the supply side is being neglected. Consultations identified that there are instances of identified positions remaining vacant for considerable periods of time due, among other reasons, to a lack of appropriately skilled Aboriginal people.

This suggests that greater emphasis is needed on education, training and support services such as mentoring, with the goal to enhance the skill base through improving apprenticeship and training completion rates.

Coverage by employment programs

There is some duplication among the employment and training programs and services. For example, Aboriginal Jobs Together receives funding to arrange pre-apprenticeship training, despite the STS already having in place existing programs and administrative processes (such as contacts and price lists with TAFE providers, and formal contracts) to facilitate such training. Such overlaps lead to inefficient use of resources, potentially diverting them from where they may be most needed.

Another example is The Way Ahead program, whose current funding only allows for mentoring of less than 10 per cent of new apprentices in NSW. At the same time, DEEWR provides individual NGOs with funds for new mentoring programs that significantly exceed the STS’s entire mentoring budget, suggesting that funding is available that could be directed into existing programs.

Coverage by business development programs

The development of programs has resulted in new programs paralleling the processes and services of some existing initiatives, leading to considerable overlaps in the activities and spatial distribution of business initiatives. The ABDP, AEDO and EDO programs all essentially involve the one-to-one provision of business advice to clients at a grassroots level, with a similar skill set and expertise needed by program officers.

In some instances, it is unclear why specific distinctions have been created between similar programs, such as in the case of the ABDP, AEDO and EDO programs, which are being implemented in different ways. The ABDP focuses on providing larger-scale services such as workshops and strategic advice for more developed business activities such as exporting and trade show attendance. AEDOs and EDOs, on the other hand, seem to engage in smaller scale business support.



The placements of ABDMs, AEDOs and EDOs also have geographic overlaps as illustrated in Figure 3.3. While program officers do travel to clients, the clustering of office locations nevertheless suggests that some regions may be oversupplied, leaving others undersupplied with services.

Figure 3.3 OFFICE LOCATIONS OF ABDP, AEDO AND EDO OFFICERS


Given the similarities between AEDOs and EDOs, it may have been beneficial to place the new EDO positions within the STS to expand the AEDO program, so that new officers could have been placed in locations that currently do not have a local office. Alternatively, EDO funding could have been used to expand the existing ABDP program, or split across the ABDP and AEDO in order to leave it with those agencies that have for many years been responsible for administering such programs. Instead, part of the funding is now used for administration of the EDO by AANSW, which is essentially a policy agency.



Collaboration and links between initiatives

The strategic frameworks and guidelines reviewed do seek to leverage existing programs and services for their implementation. For example, it is intended that the MIOB is informed by the EDAEP and NCAP programs, and that Job Compacts are assisted by the EDO network for business development and NCAP and Job Services Australia officers for employment placements and training.

However, while such links are documented and foreshadowed, the lack of coordination or a single reference point means not only that the extent of potential collaboration is not easily ascertainable, but also that supporting initiatives are often not guided by the overarching initiatives. For example:

• Job Compacts are envisaged to be supported by APIP and APIC Guidelines, and also by EDOs and NCAP officers, however, none of these supporting initiatives are formally aligned to Job Compacts. Although discussions with AANSW staff indicate that relationships are in reality established, with NCAP officers and EDOs for example participating in regional Job Compacts. However, it is not clear that the full availability of resources is known and used at any point;

• the APIC and APIP Guidelines require consultation with Aboriginal communities to determine job availability and training requirements. There is a recognised need to link to local resources such as local NCAP officers who are likely to have experience with such matters, however, the extent of collaboration is unknown.

Furthermore, all strategic frameworks, guidelines, programs and initiatives can now be considered to promote the Closing the Gap strategy, and in particular the NPA IEP. However, despite this single guiding reference, there does not appear to be a cohesive alignment of the current range of initiatives.

3.3 Conclusions and recommendations for making improvements at the program level

The review of initiatives presented in this report leads to a number of conclusions regarding program development and implementation aimed at improving the effectiveness of current efforts towards enhancing economic development opportunities and employment participation.

Consolidate functional duplication

It will be important to consolidate initiatives with similar objectives and services, such as the AEDO and EDO programs. Different initiatives should address specific different facets of Aboriginal unemployment and low levels of business ownership, and take complementary approaches so as to avoid replicating processes and activities. This is essential to achieve an efficient allocation of limited financial and human resources, ensure effective service delivery, and avoid confusion among service recipients.



In this context, it will be worthwhile examining whether — and which — initiatives may need to be re-designed, re-aligned or even discontinued based on feedback by external and internal stakeholders and other evidence that may be available. For example, it appears that the way in which Job Compacts function at the moment may need to be closely examined. Another example of a program that may benefit from changes in scope and funding is The Way Ahead program, which may be expanded to be better able to match the need (i.e. to provide access to mentoring earlier and to more apprentices than is currently the case in order to address the low retention rate in the first three months of training).

Strengthen monitoring and evaluation of outcomes

In the context of program re-design and collaboration, the limited base of performance data collected (see Box 3.1) will make it difficult to determine which initiatives need to be improved and how.

Box 3.1

DATA VARIATIONS

As mentioned above, this review found that there is no central data storage which would provide state- or system-wide data on the outcomes of Aboriginal economic development and employment efforts. As a result, there are variations in data availability and specificity and there are differences in the levels of consistency, accuracy and currency of data: • Variations in data availability and specificity — the amount and specificity of both

quantitative and qualitative data available for each initiative vary greatly due to: differences in data collection processes; initiatives being in different stages of implementation; the number of years that program managers have been with the programs; and other factors. However, data were found to be largely insufficient for a rigorous and robust assessment of the outcomes and the cost effectiveness of individual initiatives, and to allow attribution of any changes in outcomes to a particular intervention. In many cases, the only data available were process and output related.

• Consistency, accuracy and currency of data — the available data are not always up to date, and have been collected at different times or through different processes. This limits the capacity to make statements about achievements at the time of writing and compare data across different initiatives. Additionally, the accuracy of data provided could not be verified; and

• Difficulties with accessing data — there is no central data storage which would provide state- or system-wide data on the outcomes of Aboriginal economic development and employment efforts; instead, data is often administered by and stored in one section of a department or organisation or even by one person.

Source: Allen Consulting Group.

There is a need to establish improved data collection arrangements, and include systematic and comprehensive monitoring and evaluation frameworks and processes — allowing for the evaluation of both processes and outcomes — into the program design and budget. Such monitoring, in itself, should contribute not only to improved outcomes, but outcomes that can be sustained over time.



Streamline administrative arrangements

Resource efficiencies could be achieved by streamlining administrative arrangements. An example is to examine whether all programs with on-the-ground service provision could be administered by ‘specialist’ departments. In particular, whether Aboriginal business initiatives could be placed entirely within DTIRIS to enable leveraging of other resources, such as business expertise used to assist mainstream businesses; and whether all programs with education and training objectives and components could be undertaken by DEC. This may avoid potential administrative inefficiencies caused by splitting one program across two different departments, as is currently the case with the EDO Network.

In addition, consideration should be given to establishing a high-level coordination and oversight role. Such a role could include identifying linkages and leveraging opportunities; developing and maintaining a memory bank of program experiences and evaluation results; tracking service gaps and overlaps; and establishing and maintaining a website with information for jobseekers, employers, business owners and other stakeholders. Subject to suitable resources, this role could be provided by AANSW as an extension of its policy development role.

Improve and sustain career development pathways through connected programs

In general, both business and employment initiatives are important in creating job opportunities aimed at improving the economic (and social) outcomes of Aboriginal people. At the same time, existing funding may need to be re-allocated to, or additional funding made available for, education and training programs in order to address the demand/supply imbalance. It is not sufficient to create job opportunities for Aboriginal people if the supply does not match the demand. It will, therefore, be crucial to place greater focus on the complete ‘pipeline’ from early childhood through school and post-secondary education to sustained employment and career opportunities. Rather than just creating an identified position or undertaking a one-off or short-term business intervention, programs need to provide sustained levels of support. This would involve assisting Aboriginal people in, first, finishing school; then gaining access to, and completing, cadetships or traineeships or otherwise achieving the skills and qualifications required for a particular position; as well as providing on-the-job education, training and professional development opportunities.

For this to happen, new programs will need to be designed, and existing programs better connected, to enable them to work cohesively, potentially targeting multiple aims and filling gaps where they currently exist. Links between programs should be formalised (e.g. reflected in program documentation and funding schedules) to ensure that resources are leveraged most efficiently.



Chapter 4

Broader considerations

In addressing Aboriginal disadvantage, it is not enough to make incremental improvements to individual economic development and employment programs and the coordination between them. Just providing more programs or more funds has not been a solution either. A broader and different perspective is necessary. This chapter discusses some of the factors considered important to effectively tackle low economic participation rates by Aboriginal people.

4.1 Interaction between NSW and Commonwealth initiatives

Both the NSW and Commonwealth Governments administer Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives, which are delivered through various departments and agencies. Although many programs have been developed independently and there has been some alignment of programs and objectives under COAG’s NPA IEP, the overwhelming majority of the agreements’ targets require both Commonwealth and state/territory governments to work in the same areas, which requires strong levels of coordination and creates significant potential for program and service duplication.

NSW and Commonwealth powers, roles and responsibilities

Since 1967, both NSW and Commonwealth have been legally able to make laws specifically with respect to Aboriginal people.5 Both jurisdictions are also able to make laws for Australians in general, which may impact upon Aboriginal people.

COAG’s reform agenda aims to better allocate and coordinate roles and responsibilities across the jurisdictions (Department of Finance and Deregulation 2010). Overarching areas of responsibility with respect to the areas of Aboriginal employment and economic participation are listed in the superseded version of the NPA IEP (COAG 2008c), which refers to:

• ‘Commonwealth responsibility for employment assistance and welfare benefits’; and

• ‘shared responsibility with the States and Territories for industry and business development’.

This earlier version of the agreement focuses on procurement and public sector employment, and assigns joint responsibility for the majority of arenas impacting upon employment and related activities.

5 This follows the 1967 referendum which allowed the Commonwealth to make laws with respect to ‘the people

of any race ... for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws’ (Australian Constitution Act, s.51(xxvi)). Until the referendum, the Commonwealth was prevented from making laws about Aboriginal people in states, including New South Wales (Australian Law Reform Commission 2011).



Expanding on the theme of joint responsibility, the current NPA IEP (active from February 2011) notes that overarching responsibility for all of the listed areas is to be jointly shared between the Commonwealth and states and territories. However, as in the earlier agreement, the respective governments are given individual responsibility for public sector targets relating to procurement and the creation of paid positions, as outlined in the Implementation Plan for NPA IEP between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of NSW.

The other agreement particularly relevant for this report is the National Agreement for Skills and Workforce Development, which indicates that both jurisdictions are responsible for training and skills development (COAG 2009). It states that:

• states and territories have responsibility for providing public training and funding training infrastructure;

• the Commonwealth is responsible for contributing funding to support state and territory training activities; and to provide interventions and assistance in national priority areas (such as adult literacy and numeracy) and with regard to unemployed Australians/those seeking to enter the workforce; and

• the Commonwealth and state and territory governments have joint responsibility for overseeing the national training system, including determining funding requirements, frameworks and regulations. There is also joint responsibility for industry engagement, and data collection and monitoring.

That both NSW and the Commonwealth have the authority to develop policies and programs for Aboriginal economic development and employment creates the potential for significant overlap and, as aforementioned, this potential is manifested in the structure of COAG frameworks.

Overlap primarily arises from the assignment of joint responsibility, resulting in both levels of government addressing the same issues. Where the Commonwealth and NSW are given separate responsibilities, this can result in complementary services being artificially split and provided by different jurisdictions. For example, the Commonwealth retains responsibility for employment assistance and can intervene in issues such as support for unemployed people, whereas the states are responsible for the provision of training programs which are intrinsically linked to the Commonwealth responsibilities.

Furthermore, although the NPA IEP implementation plan specifies roles and responsibilities for each milestone, most milestones involve overlapping or very broad actions that necessarily require each jurisdiction to fill the gaps in service provision. The Commonwealth and NSW could potentially develop very similar programs to fill these gaps.

The agreements envisage that federal and state agencies will work together to achieve milestones, which may help to address and avoid overlaps. However, there needs to be extensive collaboration and communication for this to occur effectively, which may result in the creation of complex administrative processes.



High-level overview of economic development and employment programs delivered by the NSW and Commonwealth governments

Based on a list of programs prepared by the NSW Minerals Council in March 2010,6 it appears that the majority of both NSW and Commonwealth programs relate to creating employment in the private/NGO sector through engagement with employers, and filling these positions through the provision of job search assistance to Aboriginal people. However, this focus is greater among Commonwealth programs, which are also more likely to provide cadetships, traineeships and wage subsidies. In comparison, a greater number of NSW programs involve training and mentoring, and relate to public sector employment. Programs relating to management, leadership and community referral generally exist at the Commonwealth level and are less prevalent among NSW programs (NSW Minerals Council 2010).

In line with, and potentially consequent to, overlaps in the roles and responsibilities of NSW and Commonwealth Governments, actual and potential duplication can be observed among programs existing at both levels of government. Some such overlaps and duplications have been identified in the inventory of NSW programs in Chapter 2 (such as the EDO Network and the AEDO program). However, the fact that the scope of this review only considered NSW Government programs and initiatives (albeit some of them are jointly funded by the Commonwealth and NSW Governments) has limited its identification of duplication in programs and service delivery between NSW and Commonwealth Governments.

Consideration should therefore be given to widening the inventory of Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives in Chapter 2 to include relevant Commonwealth Government programs.

4.2 Adopting a life course approach

A revised approach by the NSW Government to improving economic development and employment outcomes for Aboriginal people in NSW will also need to consider the options to build on early intervention to ensure that the Aboriginal people are equipped with the necessary skills and capabilities to be able to take up employment opportunities. This means taking into account evidence of the impact of certain events and developments throughout a person’s life (such as experiences in early childhood, educational achievements) on employment outcomes. Any new approach will need to acknowledge that enhancing economic participation of Aboriginal people encompasses support at various life stages, such as in early childhood, in school, at the point of transition from school into employment, and well past the start of a new job to include support throughout professional life.

6 Although both NSW and Commonwealth initiatives are listed in the Overarching Bilateral Indigenous Plan

between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of NSW to Close the Gap in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander disadvantage, that document excludes a significant number of NSW programs.



Impact of experiences in early childhood on economic participation

Recent studies describe the link between building human capability and reducing inter-generational disadvantage, and children’s experiences in their family, community and early learning environments. Recently published reports by the Menzies School of Health Research (Silburn et al. 2011; Robinson et al. 2011) synthesise findings from brain research and epigenetics that demonstrates the effects of poor early childhood development on lifelong outcomes, including educational achievements and economic productivity.

The costs to individuals of poor early development include reduced educational attainment, detrimental effects of welfare dependency, reduced quality of life and limited opportunities for effective participation in their own communities and wider society. Families and society also incur high costs in dealing with the burden of social and emotional problems and ill-health, as well as the costs associated with much higher rates of welfare dependency, involvement with the justice system and incarceration.

(...) the disadvantage associated with poor early childhood development tends to have a compounding effect through the entire lifecycle. The immediate consequences of poor early childhood development include difficulties in making a successful transition into school learning, poor educational achievement and low functional literacy, early school drop-out, higher risk of unemployment, delinquency, substance misuse, crime and suicide.

Robinson et al. (2011, pp. v and 1)

Brain growth and skill development is most rapid in the first three years of a child's life. A baby is born with 25 per cent of the brain developed, and by age three up to 70 per cent of the brain is developed. Brain development during gestation to three years of age is strongly affected by the mother’s health, nutrition and other circumstances (such as whether she smokes, drinks, uses drugs, experiences stress or depression) and experiences of the child (such as neglect, abuse or other traumata). These leave an imprint that manifests itself much later in life in the form of reduced educational achievements and economic outcomes, physical and mental ill-health, and other adverse developmental and social outcomes (Silburn et al. 2011).

(...) from the age of 3 years the overall number of neurones in the brain and their synaptic connections progressively declines. This interaction of the child’s biology with their conditions and experiences of child rearing — particularly before age 5 years — literally shapes the brain circuitry which forms the foundation for all subsequent health, behaviour and learning.

Silburn et al. (2011, p. 4)7

Improving economic development and employment outcomes for Aboriginal people, therefore, means taking these findings into account and investing more resources into services for antenatal care and children aged 0-3 and their families. Despite the social benefits and return on investment governments can reap from investing more in early childhood programs (see Box 4.2) the investment profile of most developed countries currently does not align with these findings (see section on restructuring the investment portfolio below).

7 Based on Shonkoff, JP and Phillips, DA (eds) 2000, From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early

Childhood Development, National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC.



Box 4.2 DEMONSTRATING THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT IN THE EARLY YEARS

The growing consensus on the positive value of investment in the early years follows substantial economic studies of the costs and benefits of a number of high quality early childhood programs. Many of these benefits become more evident in later years as children reach adulthood. Evaluation of the long-term effects of a number of evidence-based programs in well-designed randomised controlled studies and properly implemented programs have demonstrated strongly positive cost-benefit ratios.

8

For example the cost-benefit for every dollar spent in these programs ranged from $8.74 for the High/Scope Perry Preschool program, $7.08 for the Elmira and Memphis studies of the Nurse- Family Partnership program (prenatal and early infancy), $3.78 for the Abecedarian project and $7.14 for the Chicago Child-Parent Centers.

9 More recent data

from the age 40 follow up of the High/Scope Perry Preschool program showed the original $8.74 cost-benefit ratio at age 23 had increased to $17 for each dollar originally spent.

10 The Figure below details some of the differences observed between study

participants and controls in their developmental, vocational and socioeconomic outcomes from age 5 to 40 years.

High/Scope Perry Preschool Study: Major findings at age 40

Source: Robinson et al. (2011).

Impact of educational attainment on employment rates

A study by PricewaterhouseCoopers (n.d.) demonstrates the positive correlation between educational attainment and employment rates. It examines the life pathways of an ‘average’ Aboriginal person depending on the time at which they leave school. As depicted in Figure 4.1, the study finds that employment rates increase as educational attainment increases.

8 From Wise S, da Silva, L Webster, E and Sanson, A 2005, The efficacy of early childhood interventions, AIFS

Research Report No. 14, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne; and Lynch R 2004, Exceptional Returns: Economic, fiscal, and social benefits of investment in early childhood development, Economic Policy Institute, Washington.

9 Valentine K, Katz, I and Griffiths, D 2007, Early childhood services: Models of integration and collaboration,

Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth, Perth. 10

Schweinhart, LJ, Montie J, Xiang, Z, Barnett, SW, Belfield. CR and Nores, M (2005) Lifetime Effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40, High/Scope Press, Ypsilanti, MI.

IQ 90+ at 5

Homework at 15

Basic achievement at 14

Graduated high school

Earned $20k+ at 40

Arrested 5+ times by 40

0 20 40 60 80 100

40%60%

60%40%

56%44%

73%27%

62%38%

71%29%

Program group No-program group

% % % % % %

Earned US$20k+ at 40

Control group

36%55%

60%40%

77%60%

40%15%

61%38%

67%28%



Figure 4.1 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND EMPLOYMENT RATES

Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers (n.d.), based on Figure 5.

Table 4.1 demonstrates an increase in the probability of being employed at 15-24 and 25-64 years of age with an increasing number of years completed in high school.

Table 4.1

EMPLOYMENT PROBABILITY OF AN ABORIGINAL PERSON DEPENDING ON EDUCATION ATTAINMENT

Year of high school completed

Employment probability 15-24 years

Employment probability 25-64 years

Completed Year 8 or less 19% 31%

Completed Year 9 24% 39%




Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers (n.d., Figure 5).

In addition to positively affecting the level of employment, the study also demonstrates a beneficial impact on other social indicators, such as public housing, with public housing rates decreasing as educational attainment increases.



Restructuring the investment portfolio accordingly

The aforementioned findings suggest a need to restructure the NSW Government’s investment portfolio in order to effectively tackle the challenges related to economic and employment outcomes. This will include shifting public funding towards education and employment services, as well as towards the early years of a child’s life as these lay the foundation for health, academic, economic, social and emotional outcomes later in life.

The current NSW investment profile provides a striking picture. In 2008-09, the Government spent $3,817 per Aboriginal person on services related to ‘public order and safety’ (IERSC 2010, table I.2). In contrast, only $78 per Aboriginal person were spent on ‘labour and employment services’ (IERSC 2010, table G.2) — a ratio of 5.5 (see Figure 4.2).

In some cases, a strong focus on public order and safety appears to be essential to provide the stability required for other programs to have the chance to have a positive effect. However, given that a number of studies empirically establish a negative correlation between earnings levels and criminal activity11, and others find a positive relation between unemployment and crime12, it is imperative to address this imbalance in funding levels.

Figure 4.2

NSW GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE PER PERSON IN TWO AREAS

Source: IERSC 2010, tables I.2 and G.2.

11

For example, Grogger, J 1998, ‘Market Wages and Youth Crime’, Journal of Labor Economics vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 756–91; Gould, E, D Mustard and B Weinberg 2000, Crime Rates and Local Labor Market Opportunities in the United States 1979-1997, Working Paper; Machin, S and Meghir C 2000, Crime and Economic Incentives, Institute for Fiscal Studies, Working Paper.

12 For example, Raphael, S. and R. Winter-Ebmer 2001, ‘Identifying the Effect of Unemployment on Crime’, in:

Journal of Law and Economics 44(1); Gould, E, Weinberg B and Mustard D 2000, ‘Crime Rates and Local Labor Market Opportunities in the United States 1979-1997’ The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 45-61.



Furthermore, as discussed in the previous section, evidence suggests that to effectively tackle the challenges related to educational achievement and economic productivity, greater emphasis will need to be placed on investing in the early years (pre-natal to about three years of age when a child’s brain growth and overall development are most rapid). Prevention in this sense will provide better value for money than intervention at a later stage, such as in the form of services to address unemployment or programs to re-integrate people into society after a period of imprisonment. As shown in Figure 4.3, the current investment profile does not accord with these findings (while the figure is based on data from California, the picture is likely to be similar in Australia).

Figure 4.3

MISMATCH BETWEEN BRAIN GROWTH AND PUBLIC INVESTMENT

Source: Children Now (2009; 2011).

4.3 Leveraging growth industries and regions

Another key investment consideration that could yield high returns in generating employment for Aboriginal people is to leverage the opportunities available in growing industries. The targeting of employment programs and investment towards such industries offers potentially significant returns that address both demand for workers and Aboriginal unemployment. Such leveraging also requires consideration of placed-based initiatives, given that industry presence and labour markets differ across NSW.

Economic forecasts of NSW growth industries

Predicted growth industries and skills shortages

According to forecasts prepared by Access Economics (2010), the following industries will, in order, make the greatest contribution to economic growth in NSW between 2009-10 and 2019-20:

• financial and insurance services;

• construction — particularly for new dwellings;

• professional, scientific and technical services;

• health care and social assistance — particularly aged care; and



• mining — with areas such as Cobar and Broken Hill predicted to have the highest regional growth.

Of these industries, construction and mining are forecast to face skills shortages over the next decade.

Capitalising on emerging and existing industries

Access Economics also speculates that five areas may experience growth in light of key trends, relating to climate change; demand from Asian economies; increasing use of information technologies; population growth; and population ageing. The five potential growth areas are:

• green industries — including green building and construction services, renewable energy, and markets in sustainable tourism and related accommodation;

• niche services — tourism packages for older travellers, export of health services to Asian markets, and business services (including service exports to Asia);

• higher-value manufacturing and agriculture;

• financial service exports — particularly to Asia;

• smart networks and e-services — leveraging anticipated demand (especially with the introduction of the National Broadband Network) for information and communication technologies to be used across all sectors, including health, electricity, transport, water systems and health (Access Economics 2010).

In addition, creative industries are expected to have growth potential and provide opportunities for employment.

NSW programs and services for Aboriginal people should be designed with a stronger focus on these areas and sectors in order to capitalise on the potential economic development and employment opportunities.

Regional Growth Plans

Investment guidance is also provided in NSW Regional Growth Plans, which have been developed in consultation with stakeholders and identify place-based opportunities for improving Aboriginal employment and economic development (see DTIRIS 2010). A number of industries listed in these plans coincide with the growing and emerging industries identified by Access Economics, suggesting that their potential is being recognised and acted upon at a micro-level.

The key business opportunities available in each region, as depicted in Figure 4.4, are summarised in Appendix A.



Figure 4.4 BUSINESS GROWTH PLANS DEVELOPED FOR EACH NSW REGION

Source: DTIRIS (2011d).

Although some key growth industries are region-specific, a number of industries have been identified to be growing and emerging in multiple regions. These are listed below (the first seven of which overlap with industries identified in Access Economics 2010):

• health and community services, especially aged care and child care;

• green industries, especially energy generation, building and construction and the trades; and green business;

• infrastructure and construction in general, especially residential and commercial buildings, and transport infrastructure;

• information and communications technology;

• value added agriculture (especially niche products) and food processing, and forestry;

• value added manufacturing, especially advanced manufacturing in defence and aviation; and the manufacturing of products for growing industries (such as biotechnology and pharmaceuticals for the health sector); and

• creative industries;

• education;

• mining; and

• tourism.



Implications for NSW Government initiatives

That numerous common threads can be identified from both macro-level economic forecasts as well as region-specific stakeholder views presents a strong case to target investment and skills development in those industries.

The industries identified also broadly align with the four priority workforce development sectors in the Implementation Plan for the NPA IEP between the Commonwealth and the state of New South Wales (NPA IEP Implementation Plan):

• early childhood;

• education;

• health; and

• infrastructure.

The identification of industries and development of targeted Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives should take into account the Industry Action Plans that are currently being developed by DTIRIS due for release in 2012 (DTIRIS 2011e), as well as existing place-based initiatives and resources listed in Regional Growth Plans in order to avoid duplication and to leverage work already done (see DTIRIS 2010).

In order for Aboriginal economic development and employment initiatives with a strengthened focus on NSW growth industries to be successful, they also need to:

• include targeted training and development plans to generate the necessary supply of Aboriginal workers possessing the right skills and qualifications; and

• foster the development of small-and-medium-sized enterprises through targeted strategies and plans that assist business owners and entrepreneurs to tap into the growth opportunities.

4.4 Strengthening partnerships with the private sector

The leveraging of industry growth requires strong partnerships with the private sector (considered here to include NGOs), which is a major source of employment and economic participation in NSW. In light of projected growth in the NSW economy, stronger and more targeted partnerships between the government and the private sector will help to better link Aboriginal people with available employment and business opportunities. Government-industry partnerships would also have the additional benefit of enhancing the general understanding of this area, brought about by a common language between the two parties that currently speak very different languages.



In particular, opportunities need to be realised in industries such as construction, health care and mining that are forecast to have skills shortages and high demand. Such industries are often located in regional areas and/or involve service delivery to Aboriginal people. More partnerships with mainstream industries would also be beneficial, such as with business services and advanced manufacturing. These are concentrated in Western Sydney, which, according to unpublished ABS data has the largest Aboriginal population in NSW (NSW Government 2007). The goal should be to use partnerships with the private sector to improve employment opportunities where it is most needed, such as in remote areas and regional and urban centres with a high proportion of Aboriginal people.

Engagement with industry and community organisations

Industry employment opportunities could be capitalised through effective strategies to engage the private sector, and through incentives and supports for the recruitment and retention of Aboriginal people.

One approach is to create or strengthen strategic partnerships with key industry and employer bodies. Such overarching organisations could engage employers, identify opportunities, and distribute information and resources to members. At the same time, it is important to utilise on-the-ground resources and organisations that can engage with individual employers and jobseekers within local labour markets.

The NSW Ombudsman, in its report on Addressing Aboriginal Disadvantage, highlights that partnerships between the government and industry could help to capitalise on the competitive advantages of Aboriginal people and particular communities, thus creating place-based employment opportunities. These advantages are identified in the draft Indigenous Economic Development Strategy and may arise in areas such as sustainable land and natural resource management, cultural tourism, and the arts (Australian Government 2010; NSW Ombudsman 2011). The NSW Ombudsman further notes that a number of Aboriginal bodies and corporations have ‘the potential to develop into robust economic entities’, and suggests a government strategy to ‘facilitate a closer interface’ between Aboriginal and major business entities (NSW Ombudsman 2011, p. 55).

Enabling and improving communication and the sharing of information is an important aspect of government-industry partnerships. This includes disseminating to employers information about the benefits of employing Aboriginal people in general, and the incentives and supports available from the government. Information sharing mechanisms could also enable employers, employees and other stakeholders to share best practices, learning and experiences related to the attraction, recruitment and retention of Aboriginal people.

There is also potential to collaborate with initiatives such as GenerationOne, which provides a single website to share information and resources. It also links the various stakeholders involved, including jobseekers and students, employers, training and mentoring services, and community organisations.13

13

For additional information see: http://www.generationone.org.au



Partnerships to create and support Aboriginal businesses

The NSW Ombudsman’s report also identifies the potential for partnerships and joint ventures between Aboriginal organisations (not necessarily businesses) and larger companies as a way to promote economic participation and employment. The NSW Aboriginal Land Council’s efforts to identify business opportunities and form strategic partnerships regarding joint ventures in mining and quarrying are mentioned as positive examples (NSW Ombudsman 2011).

4.5 Developing a master plan for enhancing economic participation of Aboriginal people in NSW

There is currently no overarching economic development and employment strategy in place in NSW, nor is there a consistent framework for governance of and accountability for implementing all relevant initiatives.

The absence of a body with overall responsibility for Aboriginal employment and economic capacity in NSW creates a high risk of a ‘piecemeal’ approach to addressing one of the major underlying causes of Aboriginal disadvantage.

NSW Ombudsman (2011, p. 55)

In order to underpin and align all the considerations discussed above, it will be important to develop an overarching framework — or master plan — aimed at enhancing Aboriginal economic development and employment in NSW.

Initially, this master plan would focus on a better coordination of NSW Government initiatives. Having a thorough strategic framework would enable the NSW Government to reduce duplication and overlap between programs and provide a more integrated and cohesive service offer. A strategic framework should also ensure that lines of accountability, responsibility and communication are agreed and effective where programs are delivered across more than one NSW government agency.

The longer-term goal should be to expand this master plan to reflect a joined-up approach to service delivery by both the NSW and Commonwealth Governments. A resulting common strategic framework would ensure that service delivery is not ‘siloed’ and that communication, coordination and integration of service delivery is strengthened between NSW Government agencies and the Commonwealth Government. Linkages and collaboration between education and employment initiatives, offered both by NSW Government and the Commonwealth Government, are a key success factor for future programs.

As a first step, consideration should be given to establishing a ‘roadmap’ which outlines the steps and activities required in the development of such a master plan. This would include identifying the sources that will be used to inform the master plan; how to go about implementing the master plan in order to achieve the objectives; who will be involved in the development and how; and timelines for development of the plan.



Characteristics and elements of an overarching strategy

Involvement of Aboriginal people Communities are frustrated by what they perceive to be the imposition upon them of a multitude of ‘off the shelf’ programs and services, combined with inadequate consideration of how service delivery can be integrated ‘on the ground’, and how it might best reach those who are most in need.


It is important to involve Aboriginal people in the development and implementation of the overarching strategy in order to obtain their buy-in and commitment. Through culturally appropriate consultation processes, Aboriginal people need to be given the opportunity to provide input and feedback at various stages of the development process. Working closely with local communities and stakeholders will assist in identifying and pursuing tailored and sustainable opportunities in a coordinated manner. This will facilitate better partnerships and assist in avoiding duplication as identified in this report.

Place-based approaches

Top-down policies and strategies are often unable to bring about the desired or needed outcomes, not least because of the limited buy-in by local Aboriginal people. In addition, they often do not effectively exploit the opportunities provided by local labour markets and industries.

Therefore, while identifying state-wide objectives and targets, an overarching strategy would ideally allow for localised planning and actions on how to achieve these objectives through the development of place-based solutions developed with extensive community involvement.

A clear evidence base and monitoring and evaluation framework

The evidence base for interventions in this area is either very limited or non-existent. Going forward, it is imperative that a clear link is established between program funding and evidence that the program is effective and efficient in delivering desired outcomes. In this context, it is essential to evaluate the outcomes of programs (not only their processes).

It is essential for the strategy to include a commitment to develop the evidence base for interventions in this area. This will require the establishment of clear baseline data and the use of outcome and impact evaluations to measure and monitor the effectiveness of an initiative. It is acknowledged that the formal evaluation of outcomes is difficult in some circumstances. Where this is the case, it is recommended that anecdotal evidence be collected and shared between relevant actors in lieu of formal evaluation outcomes.

In circumstances where a formal evaluation is used to determine the effectiveness of a program, the quality of evidence required needs to be considered. Leigh (2009) has developed an evidence hierarchy for use by Australian policy-makers that should be considered when designing a program evaluation (see Box 4.1). An appropriate evaluation methodology should be considered during the intervention’s development phase. The additional cost of these evaluations should be factored into the program budgets.



Box 4.1 LEIGH’S EVIDENCE HIERARCHY FOR AUSTRALIAN POLICY MAKERS

1. Systematic reviews (meta-analyses) of multiple randomised trials 2. High-quality randomised trials 3. Systematic reviews (meta-analyses) of natural experiments and before-after studies 4. Natural experiments (quasi-experiments) using techniques such as differences-in-

differences, regression discontinuity, matching, or multiple regression 5. Before-after (pre-post) studies 6. Expert opinion and theoretical conjecture Note: All else equal, studies should also be preferred if they are published in high-quality journals, if they use Australian data, if they are published more recently, and if the issue they examine is more similar to the policy under consideration.

Source: Leigh (2009).

A clear implementation plan Developing an overall economic capacity strategy is one thing; making sure that it is implemented is another.


It is essential to develop a clear implementation plan for the proposed strategy. The implementation plan should be developed in consultation with relevant stakeholders, including relevant NSW Government departments, NGOs and representatives from Aboriginal communities. It is essential for the implementation plan to include clear responsibilities and accountability for implementation, service delivery and reporting on outcomes as well as timelines for all activities.

Strong governance arrangements

It is also important that there is a single flagship agency with a strong delivery mandate to take leadership in implementing the overarching strategy. According to the NSW Ombudsman,

(...) for any strategy of this kind to be successful, it needs to be driven by a body with the necessary skills, expertise and clout for it to be able to deliver outcomes through solid partnerships with Aboriginal leaders and private sector agents.


This body would also be responsible for coordinating the strategy across the NSW and Commonwealth Governments, monitoring and evaluating the outcomes and impacts of the strategy and relevant programs and initiatives.



Appendix A

NSW Regional Business Growth Plans

In consultation with stakeholders, DTIRIS has developed 13 Regional Business Growth Plans for NSW. The regions covered by each plan are illustrated in Figure 1.1, while Table 1.1 summarises the growth industries identified in each plan.



Table A.1

GROWTH INDUSTRIES IN NEW SOUTH WALES REGIONS, PROJECTED IN AUGUST 2010

Region Industries already growing and emerging

Additional industries/skills — those identified for development/investment facilitation

Mid North Coast

• Value added agriculture (including organic production, hydroponic vegetables), forestry and horticulture • Composite manufacturing • Creative industries • Health and community services (especially aged and child care) • Information and communications technology industries • Infrastructure (renewable energy and green businesses) • Tourism

• Manufacturing (through supporting innovation and value-adding)

• Construction (especially business infrastructure)

• Logistics

Northern Rivers

• Value added agriculture (food processing, especially meat and dairy; and agribusiness), forestry (especially timber processing), horticulture, aquaculture

• Biotechnology • Boat building and related marine industry • Energy (coal seam gas; renewable energy) • Creative industries (including fashion and jewellery) • Education • Health and community services (especially aged care) • Green businesses • Tourism

Southern Inland

• Creative industries • Community services • Defence • Education • Energy (renewable and green energy, especially wind) • Forestry (softwood) • Hospitality • Information and communication technology • Infrastructure (air and rail transport), logistics • Public administration

• Manufacturing (promote value-adding) • Infrastructure (construction, especially

business infrastructure)

Illawarra/South Coast

• Agriculture (value added niche products) and aquaculture • Business and financial services • Defence and aviation

Mining technology and services



• Education • Energy (electricity generation) • Information and communications technology industries • Infrastructure, (construction, especially business infrastructure including commercial buildings); logistics and

transport (including roads, airports and port-related industries) • Manufacturing • Tourism

Riverina • Agriculture (grape and wine); horticulture, forestry (value added timber industry) • Defence • Education • Community services (especially aged care) • Logistics and transport • Manufacturing

Murray • Agriculture and fibre production (value added, niche products); forestry (softwood) • Energy (biofuels) • Construction • Defence • Infrastructure, logistics and transport (especially road and rail infrastructure) • Manufacturing (value added production, distribution) • Tourism (especially around rivers and waterways, and ecotourism)

Central Coast • Agriculture (agribusiness) • Business and financial services (especially back office operations, data processing) • Infrastructure (commercial buildings) and logistics (transport, warehousing) • Information and communications technology (especially telecommunications) • Tourism • Education

Manufacturing (promote value adding)

Hunter • Biotechnology • Defence and aviation (advanced manufacturing in these areas) • Education • Energy (green energy development; coal industry, including clean coal and coal seam gas) • Infrastructure (for coal industry, including rail and shipping; also commercial, residential construction; roads) • Medical research • Tourism (especially cruise and resort sectors)

Information communications and technology Engineering and mining sector skills

Northern Inland • Value added agriculture (especially wine and grapes; glasshouse industries; niche food production) and food processing; agribusiness research and development

• Aviation • Energy (biofuels, wind, and natural gas)

Tourism



• Environmental services (waste, design, sustainability) • Health and community services (especially aged care) • Livestock genetics and animal health • Information communications and technology (National Broadband Network rollout) • Infrastructure, transport and logistics (especially rail freight) • Manufacturing (advanced manufacturing including water technology, fabrication)

Central West • Energy (wind) • Health and community services (aged care) • Manufacturing (especially around distribution hubs) • Mining • Infrastructure, logistics and transport (especially around road and rail)

• Green skills in trades, including building and construction, electrical, plumbing, refrigeration

• Information communications and technology (especially broadband)

• Energy (biomass and other renewable energy)

Far West • Agriculture, horticulture • Tourism • Energy (renewable) • Creative industries (including film production) • Mining (minerals and petroleum)

Trade Training Centre to focus on training in metal fabrication, hospitality, and building and construction (Identified opportunities for Aboriginal people to engage in more mainstream employment)

Orana • Value added agriculture (especially viticulture), food processing; agriculture research and development • Energy (renewable, including biofuels and solar farming) • Infrastructure, transport and logistics (especially rail and road) • Manufacturing • Mining (especially proposed zirconia mine at Toongi) • Tourism (especially food and wine tourism; Aboriginal tourism assets)

• Agribusiness • Aboriginal business development

Western Sydney/Sydney

• Business, financial and property services • Health and community services (especially through hospital expansion; health tourism; research) • Infrastructure, transport and logistics (especially road and rail infrastructure) • Manufacturing (including manufacture of health products, biomedical and pharmaceutical manufacturing; food

and beverage; advanced machinery and equipment; building materials; defence and aerospace; advanced materials)

Source: DTIRIS (2010).



References

Aboriginal Affairs New South Wales (AANSW) 2008, Job Compacts — Background Information, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/data/files//Job%20Compacts%20Background%20Information.pdf>, Accessed 19 August 2011.

Aboriginal Affairs New South Wales (AANSW) 2009a, Economic Development, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/communitydevelopment/econdev.html>, Accessed 19 August 2011.

Aboriginal Affairs New South Wales (AANSW) 2009b, Discussion Paper for MCATSIA on local government and Indigenous engagement, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/communitydevelopment/econdev.html>, provided 16 September 2011 by Department of Aboriginal Affairs NSW, Sydney.

Aboriginal Affairs New South Wales (AANSW) 2010, Job Compacts, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/communitydevelopment/jobcomp.html>, Accessed 19 August 2011.

Access Economics 2010, The NSW Economy in 2020 — A foresighting study, August, <www.business.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/5379/NSWEconomyin2020_Final_100917.pdf>, Accessed 13 October 2011.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2007, Population Distribution, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, cat. no. 4705.0, AusInfo, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2010, Population Characteristics, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, cat. no. 4713.0, AusInfo, Canberra.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2011, Labour Force Characteristics of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, Estimates from the Labour Force Survey, 2010, cat. no. 6287.0, AusInfo, Canberra.

Audit Office of NSW 2011, Performance Audit: Two Ways Together – NSW Aboriginal Affairs Plan, Audit Office of New South Wales, Sydney, <http://www.audit.nsw.gov.au/publications/reports/performance/2011/two_ways_together/two_ways_contents.htm>, Accessed 3 August 2011.

Australian Government 2010, Indigenous Economic Development Strategy — Draft for consultation, Canberra, <http://resources.fahcsia.gov.au/IEDS/ieds_default.htm>, Accessed 10 October.

Australian Law Reform Commission 2011, Recognition of Aboriginal Customary Laws, ALRC Report 31, Australian Government, Canberra, <http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/38.%20Federal-State%20Issues/scope-and-limits-constitutional-power>, Accessed 10 October.



Board of Vocation Education and Training (BVET) 2009, The Way Ahead for Aboriginal People Project Final Report – October, NSW Board of Vocational Education and Training and State Training Services, Sydney.

Children Now 2009, Learning & Development — The first five years determine a lifetime, California.

Children Now 2011, The first five years determine a lifetime: Children’s early years are absolutely critical, <http://www.childrennow.org/index.php/learn/early_learning_and_development>, Accessed 17 October 2011.

Commonwealth of Australia 2011, Closing the Gap — Prime Minister's Report 2011, <www.fahcsia.gov.au/about/news/2011/Pages/2011_ctg_pm_report.aspx>, Accessed 17 October 2011.

Commonwealth of Australia and NSW Government 2009, Implementation Plan for National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of New South Wales.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2008a, National Indigenous Reform Agreement.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2008b, National Integrated Strategy for Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2008c, National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2009, National Agreement for skills and workforce development.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2010, Overarching Bilateral Indigenous Plan between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of New South Wales to Close the Gap in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander disadvantage, <http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/national_agreements.aspx>, Accessed 18 October 2011.

Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2011, National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation.

Department of Finance and Deregulation 2010, Strategic Review of Indigenous Expenditure, February, <http://finance.gov.au/foi/disclosure-log/2011/foi_10-27_strategic_reviews.html>, Accessed 18 August 2011.

Department of Local Government 2011, Workforce Planning — Useful links and resources, <http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/dlg_IntegratedPlanningIndex.asp?sectionid=1&mi=20&ml=10&AreaIndex=WFPLAN&index=1008#cim_main-content>, Accessed 20 September 2011.

Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) 2010, Regional Business Growth Plans (various), <www.business.nsw.gov.au/invest-in-nsw/regional-nsw/regional-business-growth-plans>, Accessed 17 October 2011.



Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) 2011a, Aboriginal business development, <http://www.smallbiz.nsw.gov.au/initiatives/aboriginal/bizdevelopment/Pages/default.aspx>, Accessed 19 August 2011.

Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) 2011b, Aboriginal Business Development Managers, <http://www.smallbiz.nsw.gov.au/initiatives/aboriginal/pages/bdm.aspx>, Accessed 20 September 2011.

Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) 2011c, State & Regional Development and Tourism: Client Survey, 2009-10, March, Sydney.

Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) 2011d, Regional Business Growth Plans, <www.business.nsw.gov.au/invest-in-nsw/regional-nsw/regional-business-growth-plans>, Accessed 17 October 2011.

Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services (DTIRIS) 2011e, Industry Action Plans, <www.business.nsw.gov.au/doing-business-in-nsw/industry-action-plans>, Accessed 17 October 2011.

Division of Local Government NSW 2007, Engaging with local Aboriginal communities: A resource kit for local government in New South Wales, Department of Premier and Cabinet, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/about/dlgkit.html>, Accessed 19 August 2011.

Indigenous Expenditure Report Steering Committee (IERSC) 2010, 2010 Indigenous Expenditure Report, Productivity Commission, Canberra.

Leigh, A 2009, ‘What evidence should social policymakers use?’ Economic Roundup, vol. 1, pp. 27-43.

Marmot MG and Wilkinson RG 2006, Social Determinants of Health, 2nd edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

National Disability Services (NDS) 2011, Periodic Project Report: 18 March — 31 May 2011, National Disability Services, provided by the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, NSW.

NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research 2002, ‘The economic and social factors underpinning Indigenous contact with the justice system: Results from the 2002 NATSISS survey’

NSW Government (n.d.), Overarching Job Compact: Memorandum of Understanding, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/communitydevelopment/JobCompact.html>, Accessed 19 August 2011.

NSW Government 2003, Two Ways Together — Partnerships: A New Way of Doing Business with Aboriginal People, New South Wales Aboriginal Affairs Plan 2003-12.

NSW Government 2006, Aboriginal Participation in Construction Guidelines: Applying to projects commencing 1 January 2007 <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/publications/66.html>, Accessed 19 August 2011.



NSW Government 2007, Two Ways Together — Report on Indicators, <http://www.daa.nsw.gov.au/publications/62.html>, Accessed 18 October 2011.

NSW Government 2011, NSW Government Procurement Guidelines: Guidelines for Increasing Aboriginal Participation in the Procurement of Goods and Services, Sydney, September.

NSW Minerals Council 2010, Government programs for Indigenous Employment, Training and Development, March, <www.nswmin.com.au>, Accessed 10 October.

NSW Ombudsman 2011, Addressing Aboriginal disadvantage: the need to do things differently — A Special Report to Parliament under s 31 of the Ombudsman Act 1974, NSW Ombudsman, Sydney.

NSW Procurement 2011, Aboriginal Participation in Construction, <http://www.nswprocurement.com.au/Government-Procurement-Frameworks/Construction/Policies-and-Guidelines.aspx>, Accessed 15 September 2011.

Powers, T 2011, The Way Ahead — Mentoring of Aboriginal Apprentices & Trainees: Follow Up & Assessment, March 23, Powers & Associates, Sydney.

PricewaterhouseCoopers (n.d.), Aboriginal Affairs NSW – preliminary analysis of lifetime pathways, Report commissioned by AANSW, unpublished.

Productivity Commission 2011, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2011, Productivity Commission, Canberra.

Robinson G, Silburn, SR and Arney F 2011, The value of investment in the early years: Balancing costs of childhood services, Topical paper by the Menzies School of Health Research commissioned for the public consultations on the Northern Territory Early Childhood Plan, Northern Territory Government, Darwin.

Robyn Kennedy Consultants 2011, Evaluation of the Aboriginal Communities Development Program: Summary Report, Draft, 24 June, Robyn Kennedy Consultants, Sydney.

Silburn, SR, Nutton G, Arney F and Moss, B 2011, The First 5 Years: Starting Early, Topical paper commissioned for the public consultations on the Northern Territory Early Childhood Plan, Northern Territory Government, Darwin.

State Training Services (STS) 2011, Elsa Dixon Aboriginal Employment Program: 2011/2012 Program Guidelines, NSW Department of Education and Communities, <www.training.nsw.gov.au/programs_services/funded_other/acp/edaep.html>, Accessed 20 September 2011.