Under 16 Homelessness Taskforce Ministerial Advice
December 2019
Preface/ Acknowledgements
Members of the Taskforce would like to thank all the children, young people, parents, carers, service providers and members of the State Service who participated in this process. Without your honest and open feedback and support this advice could not have been created.
Table of Contents
Preface/ Acknowledgements 2
Executive Summary 5
Background 7
Taskforce Role and Terms of Reference ...... 8
The Presenting Issue 9
What is the actual problem? 9
What does the data say? ...... 10 Australian Data 10 Tasmanian Data 11
The Problem is Solvable ...... 16
Tasmanian Research ...... 17
Consultation Findings ...... 18
Redefining the Problem ...... 19
Why do we need to Act? 21
Life Course Costs ...... 21
Intergenerational Disadvantage ...... 22
International Obligations ...... 22
National Obligations ...... 22
State Obligations ...... 22
Current Responses are Inadequate 24
Legislation and Policy ...... 24
System Level Responses ...... 25
Service Models and Practice ...... 29
What is Happening Elsewhere? ...... 31
Critical Service System Elements 32
...... 32
Authority and Accountability ...... 33
Information Collection, Sharing and Collaboration ...... 36
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 3 of 115
Place Based Flexible Service Provision ...... 38
Improved Wellbeing and Outcome Measurements ...... 39
Early Intervention and Support ...... 40
Assessment, Referral and Triage...... 43
Safe and Stable Care Environment ...... 44
Governance ...... 47
Next Steps 48
Proposed Immediate Initiatives (Next 12 Months)...... 48 Action for known Children 48 Building a Solid Foundation 48 Service System Redesign 48
Proposed Long-Term Initiatives ...... 49 Action for known Children 49 Building a Solid Foundation 49 Service System Redesign 50
Appendices 51
Appendix 1: Grouped recommendations from previous reviews ...... 51
Appendix 2: Terms of Reference ...... 64
Appendix 3: United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child ...... 69
Appendix 4: UN Sustainable Development Goals ...... 70
Appendix 5: De-identified Tasmanian Case Study...... 71
Appendix 6: Consultation Case Studies ...... 72
Appendix 7: Jurisdictional Program Responses ...... 82
Appendix 8: Draft Guiding Principles ...... 87
Appendix 9: Consultation Questions ...... 88
Appendix 10: Summary of Consultation Feedback ...... 99
Appendix 11: Taskforce Process ...... 113
Appendix 12: Consultation Poster ...... 114
PAGE 4 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Executive Summary
The number of unaccompanied children, under the age of 16, who are presenting to homeless services is increasing. Available data suggests that 98 children aged between 12-15 years presented alone (without an accompanying adult) to homeless shelters in Tasmania, which has increased by 39 per cent over the last two years. It is clearly arguable that these children are the most vulnerable in our society, they have no care and no financial means, making them highly exposed to predation, physical and sexual abuse, substance abuse and detention. No service sector or agency has explicit accountability to address the care and wellbeing needs of these children. As a result, these children often fall through the gaps of service provision, and the problem is hidden.
Service providers have indicated that the age these children are presenting to shelters is getting younger, and that they are presenting with increasing complexities. There are gaps and limitations to the current service response for these unaccompanied children. Given the complex issues faced by these children and their age, the Taskforce has identified that the problem is not ‘homelessness’ but rather, ‘carelessness’. That is, this is a cohort of children who are currently surviving without the stable care, protection or shelter needed for adequate physical, social and emotional development
While data on this cohort and their characteristics is limited, available data indicates, the number of children in this cohort appears to be small and the problem is solvable. Consistent with Australian research findings, the findings from consultations undertaken by the Taskforce Secretariat with Tasmanian children, parents and service providers found that the leading reasons these unaccompanied children leave their home predominately were family relationship breakdown, exposure to family violence, trauma, abuse and neglect. By not addressing these issues, these children face an increased risk of intergenerational disadvantage. The Tasmanian government and community will bear the increased service costs over the life course of these children.
The Tasmanian government also has an obligation as outlined in international conventions, national frameworks and state legislation, as well as a moral imperative to provide children with care, protection and a stable home environment. There are a number of points of interaction between Government Agencies and children that should trigger a coordinated and integrated response where children are identified as being at risk, most notably these include, children disengaging from education, children that come to the attention of Tasmanian Police and the Youth Justice System, children presenting to Homelessness Services, children that are identified in our family and youth service system, children presenting to adolescent health services, and children in Out of Home Care. The Taskforce Secretariat consulted with over 300 people, including children and young people (aged between 11 and 18 years), who had experienced homelessness, parents or carers of young people who had experienced homelessness, service providers that work with homeless children and young people, peak organisations and members of the general public.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 5 of 115
Experience of family violence was common, as was personal and parental mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse. Service providers corroborated research findings that ‘Family relationship breakdown’ and ‘family violence’, ‘trauma’, ‘abuse and neglect’ were the leading causes of Under 16 Homelessness.
Service providers stressed the need to resolve which service sector(s) and agency(s) have accountability for these children and their families. The three most important services to support families of children/young people were ‘family supports’, ‘family mediation and counselling’. ‘Long term family support’ and ‘family mediation and counselling’ were identified as the key things required for a child or young person to return home, if it was safe to return.
After consideration of best practice research and feedback provided during the consultation process, the Taskforce has heard and agree that any response will require immediate action for known issues and long- term evidence and place-based solutions. The Taskforce identified eight ‘critical service system elements’ required to better respond to unaccompanied children under 16 in Tasmania. To solve this problem, it is important to address each of these critical elements.
As a result of this initial scoping work the Taskforce recommends as a priority, three aligned pieces of work to be initiated by the Tasmanian Government. Which includes the following immediate initiatives to be completed over the next 12 months:
Action for known Children 1. Immediately establish a point of authority and accountability for responding to the immediate needs of children under 16 that are unaccompanied. 2. The piloting of Care Teams to provide an integrated triage and assessment system which is based on the child and youth wellbeing framework. 3. Increase capacity across the current service system to undertake individualised case coordination/case management and advocacy (including after hours) for children under 16 who are currently known to services across the three regions of Tasmania. 4. Scope the utilisation of existing services such as the Strong Families Safe Kids Advice and Referral Service or Housing Connect as the single assessment, referral and triage point for unaccompanied children under the age of 16 years, including training staff to provide a response and educating the community on the broader role of this service. 5. Take immediate action to integrate the response for these children across existing service systems based on the six domains of wellbeing, including consideration of appropriate models of co-location. Building a Solid Foundation 6. Government endorsement of the guiding principles (Appendix 8) created by the Taskforce, which will help inform any future policy development. 7. Establishment of a policy design group that will consist of representatives from government, consumers and the sector. 8. Continued promotion of the Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework, and finalisation of the Outcomes Framework for Child and Youth Wellbeing. 9. Agreement on appropriate governance and reporting requirements for implementation of Taskforce recommendations. Service System Redesign 10. Commit to a co-design of the service system with relevant Government agencies, the sector, peak bodies, young people and their families for each aspect of a new service system model. 11. Commit to funding of a secretariat that is dedicated to the codesign and implementation of the redesigned service system.
PAGE 6 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Background
The complexities associated with unaccompanied children (who are under 16), experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness, have been identified in a number of national and state reports (Appendix 1). These reports include but are not limited to: • Reducing Youth Homelessness – SARC (2014) • Tasmanian Affordable Housing Strategy and subsequent Action Plans - Department of Health and Human Services Tasmania / Communities Tasmania (2015 - 2025) • The Youth at Risk Strategy – Department of Health and Human Services Tasmania / Communities Tasmania (2017) • Too Hard? Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania – SARC (2017) • Who Cares – Supported Accommodation for Unaccompanied Children – SARC (2017) • National Report Card on Youth Homelessness (2018) • Outside In – How the Youth Sector supports the school re-engagement of vulnerable children in Tasmania – SARC (2018) A common theme in these reports is the multi-dimensional adversity that these children face, highlighting the need for multi-dimensional solutions. It is evident that no one government agency can address the challenges associated with these children; but together with parents, government still needs to be accountable and have responsibility for addressing their wellbeing and care needs. The problem of responding to the needs of unaccompanied children is not a new concept. In 2011 the issue came to a head when shelters raised “duty of care” concerns in relation to unaccompanied children under the age of 16 years presenting to their services.
A joint project between Commissioner for Children and Young People (CCYP), CYS and Housing Tasmania was established in 2012 to address this issue, however this did not result in any tangible outcomes. In April and August 2018, Anglicare Tasmania’s Social Action Research Centre (SARC) in collaboration with the Commissioner for Children and Young People, the Youth Network of Tasmania (YNOT) and the Australian Research Alliance for Children and Young People (ARACY) held two public forums seeking to better understand the issues associated with unaccompanied children experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. These forums were followed by collaborative briefings to the Minister for Human Services and a formal letter of advice from CCYP.1 In 2019, the Government released the Tasmanian Affordable Housing Action Plan 22 which recognised the need to establish an independent Taskforce. The Minister for Human Services announced the establishment of the Under 16 Homelessness Taskforce on 7 June 2019. The establishment of the Taskforce acknowledges that under 16 homelessness is a very complex problem and confirms the Government’s commitment to increase investment in services and accommodation options that address unmet demand, as well as measures to help prevent future homelessness.
1Letter from Commissioner for Children to Minister Jaensch regarding unaccompanied homeless children under 16 years of age, March 2019; [online] Available at: https://www.childcomm.tas.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019-03-01-Letter-to-Minister-Jaensch-Unaccompanied-Homeless- Under-16s-FINAL.pdf
2 Tasmanian Government, Tasmania’s Affordable Housing Action Plan 2: 2019-2023, March 2019 [online] Available at: https://www.communities.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0027/31698/TAH_Action-Plan-2019-2023.pdf
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 7 of 115
Taskforce Role and Terms of Reference Noting the pressing care and safety issues for these highly vulnerable children, the Minister established short time frames for the reporting of the Taskforce (June – November 2019).
As detailed in the Terms of Reference (Appendix 2), the purpose of the Taskforce was to: • Develop an understanding of the extent and nature of the issues associated with children (under 16) homelessness, this will be achieved through analysis of: o Available data and research material which effectively defines the numbers of children at risks and their circumstances. o The current policy responses in place to address the needs of the children at risk of homelessness including: ▪ Youth at Risk Strategy ▪ Out of Home Care Strategy ▪ Affordable Housing Strategy ▪ Other Commonwealth and State Policies ▪ Responses in other jurisdictions o Initiatives or solutions that have been presented in the past through research or other community consultations o The key stakeholders who have an interest in addressing the needs of children at risk of homelessness.
• Provide advice to the Minister on the changes required to address these issues.
• The membership of the Taskforce has been developed to provide a balanced view of youth homelessness, enable provision of advice around specific issues of youth homelessness and provide expert opinion on a potential strategy to address these issues. Membership of the Taskforce includes:
o Mr Danny Sutton - Chief Executive Officer, Colony 47 (Chair)
o Ginna Webster/Professor Michael Pervan – Secretary, Department of Communities Tasmania
o Dr Catherine Robinson - Anglicare Tasmania – Social Action and Research Centre (SARC)
o Professor Shelley Mallett – Professional Fellow, Social Policy University of Melbourne, Director of Research and Policy Centre, Brotherhood of St Laurence
o Marcus Turnbull – President, Family Law Practitioners Association of Tasmania
o Mandy Reynolds-Smith – Department of Education
PAGE 8 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
The Presenting Issue
Tasmanian Specialist Homelessness Service (SHS) data as well as recent independent research reports, reveal persistent if not rising numbers of unaccompanied children under the age of 16 living away from home (voluntarily or involuntarily), who are presenting at homelessness services. Government and community service providers also report this phenomenon and have noted the increasing complexities faced by these children. Research has demonstrated the limitations of the current service response in Tasmania to this highly vulnerable cohort.3,4 While many of these children present at homelessness services, the service sector is not funded or otherwise resourced to respond to the complex needs of these children. No service sector has explicit accountability to address these children’s care, housing, education and broader health and wellbeing needs if they are not on statutory orders.
What is the actual problem?
The presenting issue for unaccompanied children under 16 on the streets, couch surfing or accessing homelessness services is generally typified as homelessness. However, during the development of this advice the Taskforce challenged this characterisation of the problem. Analysis of national as well as state-based evidence, including recent consultations conducted by the Taskforce Secretariat, reveal that risk of homelessness or homelessness is one symptom of a more fundamental problem. The problem and its drivers are complex and multifaceted. It follows that if solutions to this problem are to be effective, they must take account of these complexities. Building on earlier work undertaken by the Youth at Risk Project Team the Taskforce consultations identified five distinct groups of children in presenting to homelessness services: 1. Children who are on statutory orders, and where the Child Safety Service has endorsed shelter accommodation as a safe placement option; 2. Children who are on statutory orders who have experienced an Out of Home Care placement breakdown which has resulted in homelessness; 3. Children who are not on statutory orders, but have been known to the Child Safety Service, and a decision has been made to not pursue a statutory response; 4. Children who have a bail or a court ordered condition that requires them to stay at a shelter; and 5. Children who are not on statutory orders and are not known to the Child Safety Service.
3Robinson, Catherine (2017) Too Hard – Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania, Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/research/too-hard/ 4Robinson, Catherine (2017) Who Cares? Supported accommodation for unaccompanied children, Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Who-cares-1.pdf UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 9 of 115
What does the data say?
Australian Data Accurate data on unaccompanied homeless children under the age of 16 living without a stable, home/care environment does not exist in any state or territory jurisdiction across Australia. The Specialist Homelessness dataset is the most relevant compilation of data for homelessness across Australia, however it does not provide accurate data on unaccompanied children under the age of 16. The data does however provide a profile of children presenting alone in 2017–18 as well as a profile of children on Child Protection orders age 0-17 years who presented alone or with family and caregivers to specialist homelessness agencies. Of the 43,200 young people (aged 15–24) presenting alone to a specialist homelessness agency in 2017–18: • Just over one quarter (26%) were aged between 15-17 years • Almost two thirds (64%) identified as female • One quarter (25%) identified as indigenous • A high percentage reported mental health issues (41%). • Almost 2 in 5 (37% or 15,800 clients) reported experience of domestic and family violence. • Nearly one third (29%) sought assistance for family violence or family breakdown.5 Of those children aged 10 years and above on current Child Protection Orders who presented at homelessness services (alone or with family) nearly half (46%) had experienced family violence and 17% reported both family violence and mental health issues.6
5 https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/homelessness-services/specialist-homelessness-services-2017-18/contents/client-groups-of-interest/young- people-presenting-alone 6 https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/homelessness-services/specialist-homelessness-services-2017-18/contents/client-groups-of-interest/children- on-care-and-protection-orders PAGE 10 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Tasmanian Data Homelessness Data Homelessness data on children in Tasmania, is derived from Confidentialised Unit Record Files (CURF) data and Agency data from the Specialist Homelessness Services system dataset. It should be noted however that this data only includes children who access the homelessness service system, usually youth shelters. It does not capture children who are couch surfing with family, friends or acquaintances or living on the street and have not come to the attention of homelessness services. The dataset itself is limited, with minimal provision for data collection on the care and wellbeing needs of these children. Importantly this data is not linked with data from child safety, health, education or youth justice services. By failing to capture data from multiple relevant sources it is highly probable that our understanding of the nature of the problem, its myriad of causes and its scale is distorted. The most recent Tasmanian data (2018-19) shows there were 98 children aged between 12-15 years who presented alone (without an accompanying adult) to homeless shelters in Tasmania. This data (and the data presented in Table 1) represent unique clients who presented to services by Region. It does not provide information on the number of overall presentations to homelessness shelters over this time by this cohort or include multiple presentations by the same child to homelessness services. As shown in Table 1, from 2016-17 to 2018-19 there has been a gradual increase in the number of children aged 12-15 years who have presented to homelessness services in each region. The majority of clients presenting to homelessness services were from the South.
Table 1. Young People aged 12-15 Presenting Alone by Region
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 Total
Male Female Male Female Male Female South 14 18 10 38 17 34 131 North 3 3 19 12 13 17 67 North West 9 13 7 4 11 6 50 Total 26 34 36 54 41 57 248
The number of children presenting to shelters across each region of Tasmania between 2016-17 and 2018- 19 is shown in Figure 1. The number of children in this cohort has been steadily increasing in the South, increased in the North initially and then stabilised and has remained relatively consistent in the North West.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 11 of 115
Figure 1: Number of unaccompanied children presenting to shelters by region 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
South North North West
Figure 2 shows that across Tasmania the number of female clients in this cohort was greater than male clients across each of the years, and that the overall number of males and females increased between 2016-17 to 2018-19.
Figure 2: Number of unaccompanied children under 16 years presenting to shelters by gender 60
50
40
30
20
10
0 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
Male Female
Previous CURF data from 2017-18 indicates that the main reason provided by children who presented to the Tasmanian homelessness service system was ‘relationship/family breakdown’ (32%). Only 13 children cited ‘transitioning from foster care or child safety placements’ as a reason for seeking assistance from homelessness services. Compared to data from 2016-17 there were more children presenting from emergency accommodation the week before presentation, indicating that these children are likely to be moving between crisis shelters (shelter hopping). Housing Tasmania is working with the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) to improve access to data specifically about young people under 16 assisted by Specialist Homelessness Services. There are limitations due to national data collection recording age categories of the 15 to 17-year age group. Options are being explored to access data about under 16s on a regular basis as well as maintaining consistency with other jurisdictions and the national data collection.
PAGE 12 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Youth Services Data There is also service data available on specific cohorts of Tasmanian children with complex needs who are known to a range of children and youth services. Evidence shows that the issues these children present with, such as trauma and abuse, criminality, disengagement with school and mental health issues, places them at an increased risk of homelessness. Data provided below highlights the diversity of services these children present to including child safety services, the youth justice system and/or youth detention, programs such as Targeted Youth Support and Supported Youth Program and flexible learning programs. It should be noted that it is likely that some of these children will access more than one service due to their level of complexity.
Children on Care and Protection Orders Table 2 provides an overview of the number of ‘self-selected’, ‘independent’ and ‘shelter’ placements that have been recorded for children 10 -16 years of age on care and protection orders. While these have increased since 2017-18, the number of these placements has minimally decreased compared to 2016-17 data.
Table 2. New self-selected or independent placements or placements in shelters for children 10-16 years of age on care and protection orders7
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
Shelter 5 2 2
Self-selected 20 16 22
Independent (Not self-selected) 8 4 6
Shelter: Crisis accommodation provided by the non-government sector (usually SAAP-funded services).
Self-selected: Children who are self-placed without approval for the placement by Children and Youth Services.
Independent: Includes unsupported and supported independent living:
• Unsupported: Young person who is living by their own means unsupported. This excludes self-selected placements as these young people are counted in the “self-selected” category. • Supported: Including private board and lead tenant households. This type of care is arranged and supported i.e. rent may be paid for. While Table 3 suggests that during 2018-19, children aged 10-16 years in Out of Home Care who have had 3 or more non-respite placements during the year, is higher than in the two preceding years.
Table 3. Children 10-16 years of age in out of home care who had 3+ non-respite placements during the year8
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
Children in out of home care (10-16 years) 554 588 643
Children with 3+ non-respite placements 28 26 48
% with 3+ non-respite placements 5.1% 4.4% 7.5%
7 Data obtained from Children and Youth Services, Dec 2019. There are issues with the recording of placements in the Child Protection Information System which may affect the above figures. Due to these data quality issues and the low numbers of placements, these figures and any trends should be interpreted with caution. Self-selected independent placements are counted as “self-selected” in the above table, not independent placements.
8 Data obtained from Children and Youth Services, Dec 2019. There are issues with the recording of placements in the Child Protection Information System which may affect the above figures. As such, these figures should be interpreted with caution. This is an established internal measure which is usually reported for all children 0 to 17 years of age. There are national measures of stability of placement; however, these relate to children who have exited out of home care only.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 13 of 115
Targeted Youth Support and Supported Youth Programs The Targeted Youth Support Service (TYSS) in the South of Tasmania and the Supported Youth Program (SYP) in the North/North West provide intensive, therapeutic case management for a group of children and young people aged 10-18 years who have multiple complex needs. These programs aim to improve developmental outcomes, improve safety and wellbeing, reduce offending, reduce individual risk factors and increase connectedness with family, community and school and reduce the risk of homelessness. At any one time there is provision for 40 children and young people to access the TYSS program in the South and 40 children and young people to access the SYP program in the North/NW. Participants are able to remain in the program for up to 2 years. These programs tend to run at capacity, however if children and young people are unable to access the program when required they are generally diverted to other programs delivered by the NGO so that they can still receive a service/be worked with until a space becomes available. A review of the TYSS and SYP programs undertaken by DHHS in 20129 showed that these programs benefit clients by enhancing their overall wellbeing, increasing their participation in the community and enhancing the stability of their accommodation and living situation. Specifically, the review highlighted the contribution that these programs make in the prevention of youth homelessness.
Family Support Services The Integrated Family Support Service (IFSS), deploy a range of interventions to address family needs for support, information, access to services, skill development and community connection. Data for the 2017 – 18 period identified 194 families who have been provided support for more than 12 months, with 82 families being provided the same length of support for the first two quarters of 2018-19. The Intensive Family Engagement Service (IFES) is a family support program delivered in partnership with Child Safety Services. The program works intensively with families for a short period with the aim of reducing the number of families requiring statutory intervention or placement of children in out of home care.10 Between December 2017 and June 2019 IFES delivered support to 82 families across the state (29 in the North, 15 in the North-West and 38 in the South). As at June 2019, 97 per cent of contracted service contact hours were delivered to families (where families did not withdraw from the service early) with 70 per cent of these children and young people assessed as being able to remain in the home post service delivery. In 2019 the University of Tasmania submitted the final report of an external evaluation of the IFES service that found that it is broadly producing improved outcomes for families that receive the service, but also provided a range of recommendations on how the service can be improved. The Department incorporated these recommendations into an internal review process and produced a refined service model for implementation in 2020.
Lead Coordination Service The Lead Coordination Service (LCS) was trialled from 2017 through to 2018 and independently evaluation by the University of Tasmania. UTAS indicated there were a range of beneficial client outcomes realised as well and improvements in health and psychosocial wellbeing. To date, 49 people have participated in the LCS, including: 26 individual or adult families at risk and 23 youth at risk. Clients have created over 300 goals, with over 50 per cent completed and another five per cent underway.
9 Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Children and Youth Services, Targeted Youth Support Services (TYSS) Mid-Term Review – Summary Report, 2012. 10 https://www.strongfamiliessafekids.tas.gov.au/service-directory/intensive-family-engagement-services-ifes PAGE 14 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
The Youth at Risk Strategy Implementation project has commissioned a total of 87 client positions or quotas in the LCS for 2019-20 and 2020-21. Of these, 57 are high intensity quotas and another 30 are moderate intensity quotas. These quotas are forecast to approximate 117 youth at risk individuals participating in the LCS. The Joined-Up project has also commissioned 12 adult quotas for 2019-20. Of these, six are high and six are moderate intensity quotas, forecast to approximate 17 adults or families at risk. The Joined-Up project is offering the LCS to government and community sector organisations to commission quotas in the LCS for people with multiple and complex outcomes. Youth Justice Youth justice clients are also a cohort with multiple complexities that places them at an increased risk of homelessness. Table 5 shows the number of children and young people in Tasmania aged 10-17 years who were on community- based supervision orders on an average day from 2015-2018. The data shows that average daily numbers have been steadily increasing over this period, with a marked increase shown in the number of females on community-based supervision orders. Between July 2014 and July 2018, 8.17% of Tasmanian young people aged 10-17 years who were on a child protection order were also on a youth justice supervision order.11
Table 5. Children and young people aged 10-17 years under community-based supervision orders on an average day12
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Male 74 69 71
Female 14 22 30
Total 88 91 101
In 2017-18 there were 52 Tasmanian young people aged 10-17 who were in detention. It should be noted that Tasmania in 2017-18 had the lowest rate of young people in detention by population (per 10,000 young people) compared to all other states and territories13.
The Tasmanian Government currently funds 12 annual places in the Transition from Detention Program in Southern Tasmania and 26 annual places in the Bail Support Program across Tasmania, this funding expires in June 2021. A Social Return on Investment study conducted by Ernst & Young in 2015 on Save the Children’s youth justice programs in Tasmania over a period of 4 years, found that for every $1 invested, $3.50 of economic and social value was gained. Education Data The Department of Education is strongly committed to keeping young people in education, with a number of current approaches and strategies that are designed to support at risk young people to remain connected to schools. These include, but are not limited to: Student Engagement Initiative, Child and Student Wellbeing strategy, Safe Homes Safe Families, the Family Engagement Initiative, Trauma Awareness Initiative, School and Community partnerships, YEET – Youth Engagement in Education and Training Project and Guidelines for Inclusive Practice. Each region has a Tier 4 site that provides an educational program for young people who have become disconnected from mainstream school or are possibly transitioning back into the community from Ashley
11 Source: AIHW child protection and youth justice supervision linked data collection 2014–15 to 2017–18 12 Source: AIHW Juvenile Justice National Minimum Dataset (JJ NMDS) 2000–01 to 2017–18. 13 Ibid UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 15 of 115
Youth Detention Centre. The Department of Education, in partnership with Save the Children, also provides an Outreach program OUT TEACH in the North West and the South. The Department of Education also provides a state-wide Education on line provision - Edzol. This involves a face to face tutoring sessions and online support with educational provision focusing on the National Curriculum’s General Capabilities and Acara Progressions. This program provides significant personalised support. Eschool (State-wide) is another educational provision that caters for students k-12 who meet specific criteria and currently are unable to a attend a mainstream school. Tier 3 is a flexible education provision offered on site at mainstream schools/colleges and offers an integrated approach to engaging with mainstream education. Figure 3 provides an overview of the number of children engaged with Tier 3 and 4 programs or programs offered by non-government providers.
Figure 3 - Children Engaged with
Flexible Education Provision
305
119 102 88 66 71 0 44 16
NORTH WEST NORTH SOUTH
Tier 3 Tier 4 (Gov) Tier 4 (Non-Gov)
As shown above, there is a wide range of data available from a number of services that can provide an indication of children who may be at risk of carelessness (the absence of care), which may include homelessness. However, there is no linkage of this data across services, no way of telling if children are accessing multiple services (and therefore being counted multiple times), no way of tracking these children as they progress through the service system and no consistent case management approach or monitoring of the outcomes of these children. The Problem is Solvable Although the data for this cohort is incomplete, it does indicate that in Tasmania the number of children currently accessing shelters is relatively small. This problem is solvable, notwithstanding difficulties addressing entrenched trauma, poverty and other complexities these children face.
Effort to address this issue will be enhanced by the development and implementation of an Outcomes Framework to accompany the Tasmanian Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework which is currently being developed by the Department of Communities Tasmania.
PAGE 16 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
The Outcomes Framework will ensure a commitment to child and youth wellbeing which will inform the design and delivery of services within agencies. Once implemented, agencies will be held accountable for delivering improved wellbeing for children and young people, via the measurement of progress against key indicators. Tasmanian Research
While the administrative data provides little insight into these children’s circumstances, findings from several Tasmanian research studies14,15 as well as consultation undertaken by the Taskforce secretariat, shed light on some of the characteristics and experiences of these unaccompanied children. Findings from these studies are not based on representative samples making it impossible to know the composition of the cohort, including the relative numbers with longstanding complex family issues of poverty, abuse, neglect and violence. Nonetheless these studies and consultations do provide in-depth understanding of the contours of the problem(s) and some of its drivers.
In the report Reducing Youth Homelessness (2014) 16, Tasmanian young people (14-20 years) identified that they became homeless due to reasons relating to their parents or family life (e.g. neglect, abuse, parental alcohol, drug and mental health issues, poverty, family homelessness). The pressures on Tasmanian families is highlighted in the findings from the recent Rental Affordability Index (November 2019)17 that showed Greater Hobart as the least affordable capital city in Australia. Even Tasmanian families earning an average wage are now having to pay 30% or more of their income on rent and rental affordability in Tasmania shows no sign of improving as the gap between income levels and rent prices continues to widen. Robinson’s (2017) qualitative study of 16 Tasmanian unaccompanied homeless children aged 14-17 years concluded that many came from families experiencing significant and longstanding poverty and school exclusion.18 When interviewed none of the children were on statutory orders or placed in OOHC. Despite this they reported highly complex living circumstances warranting current Child Safety Service assessment if not ongoing involvement. For example, many reported sustained exposure to parental mental illness, drug use, family violence and crime. They also described significant and longstanding experiences of abandonment, abuse and neglect. Some had significant caring roles within the family. Many were also engaged with youth justice and reported personal mental health, alcohol and drug issues. Most were marginally attached to or completely disengaged from school.
A follow up study by Robinson (2018) highlighted the significant barriers these vulnerable young people face when trying to engage or re-engage with school. Many felt excluded from schooland had struggled to learn and access the necessary materials (books stationery etc) to support their learning.19
While exposed to cumulative harm, children reported that they fled the family home when the violence, abuse or neglect or parental mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse or their own caring responsibilities
14 Robinson, Catherine (2017) Who Cares? Supported accommodation for unaccompanied children, Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Who-cares-1.pdf 15 Robinson, Catherine (2018), Outside In: How the youth sector supports the school re-engagement of vulnerable children in Tasmania, Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/research/outside-in-how- the-youth-sector-supports-the-school-re-engagement-of-vulnerable-children-in-tasmania/ 16 Anita Pryor, Dickins Mary, Flanagan Jo, Law Margie, Hughes Ann (2014) Reducing Youth Homelessness: advice from young people on how to reduce homelessness in Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/wpcontent/uploads/2017/05/Reducing- youth-homelessness.pdf 17 SGS Economics and Planning, Rental Affordability Index, November 2019 [online] Available at: https://www.sgsep.com.au/assets/main/Projects/SGS-Economics-and-Planning_RAI-Nov-19.pdf 18 Robinson, Catherine (2017) Who Cares? Supported accommodation for unaccompanied children, Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Who-cares-1.pdf 19 Robinson, Catherine (2018), Outside In: How the youth sector supports the school re-engagement of vulnerable children in Tasmania, Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania [online] Available at: https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/research/outside-in-how-the-youth- sector-supports-the-school-re-engagement-of-vulnerable-children-in-tasmania/ UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 17 of 115 finally became unbearable. Deeming themselves old enough to escape, they left the home moving between couch surfing, extended family/friends and homeless shelters.
In short it seems that many of these children have had long experience of abuse and neglect, some of which has gone undetected by child safety agencies, and/or has been detected and presumed resolved or left unattended.
These findings are consistent with those described in the Taskforce consultations. Consultation Findings The Taskforce Secretariat consulted with over 300 people, including children and young people (aged between 11 and 18 years), who had experienced homelessness, parents or carers of young people who had experienced homelessness, service providers that work with homeless children and young people, peak organisations and members of the general public. These consultations were conducted through face to face discussions or confidential online surveys.
Face to face consultations were held throughout Tasmania, including remote and regional areas on the West and East Coasts from July to September 2019.
The online survey received feedback from 206 people; this included 89 children aged 16 years or younger, of these 23 identified themselves as homeless or at risk of homelessness.
In addition to the online survey 114 people were spoken to in face to face consultations either individually or in small groups. Of these face to face consultations, 64 responses were from young people between the ages of 11 and 18 years.
Questions for the online survey and the questions used for face to face consultations were the same, with face to face consultations allowing further expansion and exploration of answers. The questions used for consultations can be found in Appendix 9, and a more detailed summary of the consultations can be located in Appendix 10.
Like the earlier research (described above) the ‘at risk or homeless children’ consulted by the Taskforce reported highly complex and impoverished family and personal circumstances. This included experiences of longstanding and sustained abuse and neglect and widespread disengagement from education. Experience of family violence was common, as was personal and parental mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse. Service providers corroborated research findings that ‘Family relationship breakdown’ and ‘family violence’, ‘trauma’, ‘abuse and neglect’ were the leading causes of Under 16 Homelessness.
Children identified that the main barrier for them in accessing homelessness services was because they were ‘scared’ and concerned about their ‘safety at services’. These safety concerns were related to crime, threats from other residents, older cohorts of young people in shelters and stories or rumours they had heard about services from other young people.
When children who were residing in shelters or were otherwise homeless were asked what would be needed for them to return home, the overwhelming response was that there was ‘nothing’ that could be done to assist them returning to their home and family.
This disturbing finding highlights the need for early intervention with these children and their families, before issues reach a crisis point and the child enters the homelessness system. Service providers stressed the need to resolve which service sector(s) and agency(s) have accountability for these children and their families.
The three most important services to support families of children/young people were ‘family supports’, ‘family mediation and counselling’.
PAGE 18 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Family support (including in-home intensive support for parents of teenagers)’, ‘increasing the number of shelter beds’ and ‘providing a range of flexible housing options for young people’ were identified as ways to assist in preventing homelessness for under 16s. The top three services considered important to support under 16s who are homeless were ‘safe shelter/accommodation’, ‘family support and reunification’ and ‘mental health support and services’.
‘Long term family support’ and ‘family mediation and counselling’ were identified as the key things required for a child or young person to return home, if it was safe to return.
Children identifying as LGBTI appeared to be over represented during the consultation process, while data is very difficult to obtain for this cohort, a 2017 study by the Council to Homeless Persons in Victoria identified that these children are twice as likely to face homelessness than other children.20
Feedback received from Working it Out, suggested that ‘Services are designed to assist families to stay intact and for young people to stay in their homes, must be well trained in understanding and dealing with these LGBTI issues and/or have dedicated LGBTI services’ they also suggested that ‘Faith-based organisations can be particularly problematic (understanding needs). Not particularly for current practices, but for associations people make.’ This feedback was consistent with feedback received from LGBTI young people.
Feedback received from the relevant peak bodies, Shelter Tasmania, Youth Network of Tasmania and Tasmanian Council of Social Services was consistent, highlighting a need for ‘improved information sharing and data’ and the need to include the ‘community/housing/youth sector in the development of any response’. The Commissioner for Children and Young People raised concerns regarding ‘children on Youth Justice orders/bail as being a particularly vulnerable group who need to be considered when developing a response.’ The Commissioner suggested reviewing programs such as Saltbush in the Northern Territory21, which provides employment, intensive mentoring, counselling and Supported Bail Accommodation, when considering a response for these children. Improved policy clarity relating to the ‘duty of care for unaccompanied children under 16’ was also raised by the relevant peak bodies, the Commissioner for Children and Young People and the Tasmanian Youth Housing and Homelessness Group (TYHHG), who also flagged a need to develop ‘different accommodation models to meet the different needs of children.’ In addition, TYHHG members suggested there is a ‘lack of case management and outreach functions for children under 16 in Launceston and Hobart, as shelters are not funded to provide these functions’, the TYHHG members did however, note that Youth Family and Community Connections in the North West retained case management functions within their shelters and therefore has differing needs to other areas of the State. Redefining the Problem
Analysis of the administration data, available research and consultation findings suggests the characterisation of the problem as ‘under 16 youth homeless or risk of homelessness’ fails to account for the age of this cohort, appropriate development and care needs and their personal and familial circumstances. It misrepresents the problem. The United Nations (UN) defines those under the age of 16 as children. All of the relevant Australian research including Tasmanian studies, highlight the lack or loss of care that these children experience as well as their disconnection or marginal attachment to education. They are more accurately described as:
20 Council to Homeless Persons, Website, 2017, http://chp.org.au/lgbtq-victorians-twice-likely-face-homelessness/ 21 https://www.saltbushnt.org.au/ UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 19 of 115
‘unaccompanied children (10- 16 years), living without the stable care, secure home, and sustained engagement in education that enables their wellbeing needs to be met.’ In short, the problem is carelessness (the absence of care), where families, the State and the broader community have failed to provide a supportive nurturing environment to enable these children to flourish. This characterisation of the problem more accurately aligns with the accounts provided by children’s service providers and researchers about the experiences and circumstances faced by many in this cohort, it says little or nothing about the drivers (as opposed to triggers) of this multifaceted issue, nor indeed the solutions. This lack of access to quality care underlines family, community, as well as government’s accountability for addressing these issues.
“We currently have an unaccompanied 12 year old boy staying at the shelter. He sleeps with his teddy and nightlight on, while sucking his thumb.” Shelter Worker – Northern Tasmania
PAGE 20 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Why do we need to Act?
There are compelling reasons why governments and communities need to act to address the issues facing unaccompanied children under the age of 16 who experience carelessness (the absence of care). Governments, communities and families are morally obliged to ensure that children are provided with care and protection, including a stable home environment. In addition to the moral obligation to act, the economic and social costs associated with inaction are immense over the life course of a child experiencing homelessness, these costs compound over their life, exposing this cohort to a life of intergenerational disadvantage. The Tasmanian Government also has an obligation under current legislation, and as signatory to the agreements discussed in this section, to recognise and uphold the rights of children and provide safety, shelter, education and the provision of basic material needs. Despite these commitments, there are currently a number of unaccompanied children in Tasmania, who are under 16, that are living without the care and protection of their family or other guardians, in unsafe environments, who have difficulty accessing education and are not having their basic material needs met. While the obligation of governments and families to act on behalf of these children is indisputable, currently there is no clear legislative response to address the needs of this population through Child Safety or Homelessness legislation in any Australian jurisdiction, including Tasmania. Life Course Costs A study in 2016 by Swinburne University, University of Western Australia and Charles Sturt University22 found that apart from the cost of supported accommodation provided through the Specialist Homeless Service system there are additional costs to the Australian economy and community when young people (or any Australians) experience homelessness. The total costs of health services and the justice system due to young people experiencing homelessness is an average of $17,868 per person per year; $14,986 per person per year more than unemployed youth. These costs do not include the additional lifetime impact of early school leaving and low engagement with employment. The study extrapolated the annual costs at $747million annually or $626m annually more than for young unemployed youth. This exceeds the total cost (approx. $619m) of providing Specialist Homelessness Services to the 256,000 people (young and old) assisted by the system over the same period. As referenced in the Youth at Risk Strategy23, a separate 2012 study conducted by the University of New South Wales mapped the life course costs associated with homelessness, one case study ‘Casey’ cost the community $5.5 million between the age of 10 to 21. There is no doubt that there would also be significant ongoing costs to the individual and the community as these challenges extend into adulthood24. The Youth at Risk Strategy also included the story of a young person in Tasmania (with some key facts changed for anonymity). The case study (Appendix 5) highlights systemic failures across multiple Government agencies to provide adequate care and safety for this child and reinforces the importance of early identification and intervention.
22 The Costs of Youth Homelessness in Australia project is an ARC Linkage research project (2016) 23 The Youth at Risk Strategy – Department of Health and Human Services Tasmania / Communities Tasmania (2017) 24Baldry, E. et al. (2012). Life course institutional costs of homelessness for vulnerable groups. School of Social Sciences University of New South Wales. pp 88 to 92.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 21 of 115
Intergenerational Disadvantage
Evidence from multiple sources reveals that the impact of these early experiences makes these children at greater risk of intergenerational disadvantage.25 For example, those children who leave home before the age of 16 are more likely to experience chronic homelessness and those who exit education early are 2.5 times more likely to experience social exclusion. They are also more likely to remain marginally attached to the labour force26. In short failure to act is a moral failure as well as a lost opportunity to maximise the contribution that these children can make to the broader community over their life course. International Obligations Australia is a signatory to two relevant international conventions that guide our obligations and responses to children. These are:
• United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child (simplified version),27 • The UN Sustainable Development Goals28
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child specifies the obligations of parents and governments to do what is best for the child, including the provision of care, protection, health and wellbeing and freedom from all forms of discrimination and exploitation (Refer to Appendix 3 for description of the relevant Articles).
The UN Sustainable Development Goals aim to address global challenges such as poverty, inequality, climate change and justice in order to provide a more sustainable future for everyone. Working towards goals such as no poverty, zero hunger, good health and wellbeing, quality education and reduced inequalities are just as relevant for vulnerable children in Tasmania as they are for children in other parts of the world (Refer to Appendix 4 for description of the relevant Goals).
National Obligations Australian governments, including the Tasmanian Government, adhere to the National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children29. This framework is an ambitious, long-term approach to ensuring the safety and wellbeing of Australia’s children and aims to deliver a substantial and sustained reduction in levels of child abuse and neglect over time. State Obligations Tasmanian legislation provides a broad statement around the responsibility of the Tasmanian Government for the wellbeing of children.
25AIHW, Australia’s Welfare (2017), Chapter 1.6; available online at [https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/9592571c-801c-46be-9c9d- 5d0faffbb5b/aihw-australias-welfare-2017-chapter1-6.pdf.aspx] 26 Johnson, G and Chamberlain, C (2016) From Youth to Adult Homelessness, Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43(4) 563-582. 27United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Simplified version); https://www.unicef.org.au/Upload/UNICEF/Media/Our%20work/childfriendlycrc.pdf
28 https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
29 https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/child-protection/nfpac/contents/summary
PAGE 22 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Section 10B of the Tasmanian Children, Young People and Their Families Act 1997 states:
‘The Tasmanian Government has responsibility for promoting and safeguarding the wellbeing of children and, if required, assisting families in fulfilling their responsibilities for the care, upbringing and development of their children’.
The Tasmanian Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework30 defines wellbeing as ‘The state where a child or young person feels loved and safe; has access to material basics; has their physical, mental and emotional needs met; is learning and participating; and has a positive sense of culture and identity’.
30 Tasmanian Government, Tasmanian Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework, [online] Available at: https://www.strongfamiliessafekids.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/5549/1-Tasmanian-Child-and-Youth-Wellbeing-Framework-Web.pdf UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 23 of 115
Current Responses are Inadequate
Analysis of Australian research, including recent Tasmanian studies and consultations undertaken by the Taskforce, identified several key drivers or sub-components of the problem that have previously been highlighted by governments, researchers and service providers and, in some instances, children themselves. These included: 1. Systemic gaps and accountability failures that are preventing or limiting these children’s ability to access stable care, education, a secure home environment or support services to meet their wellbeing needs. 2. These gaps span, legislation, policy, service and education models, as well as practice and community attitudes which can lead to stigmatisation. Legislation and Policy State and Territory governments in Australia that have examined issues for this cohort point to the lack of clear accountabilities for care and protection of these children in their relevant Child Safety legislation.31 Tasmania is no different. There are several dimensions to this. Where children presenting at homelessness or other services are the subject of statutory orders, the State has primary accountability and decision- making authority in relation to these children. Although legislation may be clear on this point, there is no articulation of a set of principles that guide service responses or even establish enforceable responsibilities of the State or others in relation to these children. At best, this makes it difficult for service system to be formed, at worst it makes it easier for governments to evade their responsibilities. The Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1997 clearly defines the responsibilities of Government and the role of the child’s family. It also defines clearly the authority to transfer custody and guardianship from the part to the State, the circumstances in which the use of that authority is appropriate and the process for doing so. However, where children are not the subject of any statutory orders and where the family of a child is, at any given moment, failing to uphold its primary responsibility for the care, upbringing and development of the child, the responsibilities and authorities of the State or anyone else to care for these children is much more ambiguous and arguably ineffective. As described in a recent report on the legal and policy gaps in supporting homeless children by the NSW ombudsman:
… “…, key decision-making authority remains with the child’s parents. This is despite these children commonly having no, or very minimal, contact with their parents. For example, unless consent is obtained from a parent to exercise ‘parental responsibility’ in making decisions about important matters such as certain forms of medical care and school enrolment, neither the service nor FACS has the legal authority to make these types of decisions. This applies even if consent has been given by a parent for the child to stay in a homelessness service” (Exec summary)32
31 NSW Ombudsman, More than shelter – addressing legal and policy gaps in supporting homeless children, June 2018, Available at: https://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/56133/More-than-shelter-addressing-legal-and-policy-gaps-in-supporting-homeless- children.pdf
32 ibid PAGE 24 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
One response to this ambiguity would be to use the guardianship provisions of the Act more frequently. This is unlikely to be an acceptable extension of the use of this power in the eyes of the Courts and, as evidence clearly shows, is unlikely to be the interest of the child or young person. Legislative limitations and ambiguity in relation to duty of care for these children translates as a lack of clarity about the accountabilities and/or responsibilities of family and key government departments or divisions, most notably Child Safety Services, Housing Services and Education. In order to address the limitations a number of jurisdictions have developed policy and practice guidelines for under 16s who present to shelters unaccompanied (NSW/QLD). Currently, Tasmania does not have any policy or practice guidance for shelters that are currently working with or accommodating these children. Given that Tasmanian crisis shelters are contracted to work with unaccompanied children from the age of 13 years, the lack of policy and practice guidance in this area is an obvious gap. These children need consistency and constancy of care, with smaller age ranges and smaller staff to client ratios and a focus on family reunification wherever possible – something the current crisis accommodation model in Tasmania is unable to offer. However, policy and practice guidelines alone will not solve this problem for all children. As identified by a recent report by the NSW Ombudsman33, without the corresponding legislation to enforce the accountability for these children, they will still fall through the gaps, with no service or agency taking responsibility for them when they are seen as being too hard. Alignment between legislation, policy and practice is required to ensure the care needs for this cohort are being met. System Level Responses While State and Territory governments typically acknowledge the vulnerability and care needs of this cohort, they often continue to cast the problem facing these children as homelessness and the solution as shelter. This response is unsurprising given that many state and territory government currently struggle to provide secure care for all children on statutory orders in their teen years due to budget and system constraints, limited if not ineffective care models, workforce shortages and some children’s rejection of the State’s inadequate care role. Prevention and early intervention programs designed to support struggling families are also very limited. State and Territory government departments with responsibility for specialist homelessness services often assume some limited responsibility for these children, even though under the terms of their agreement they are not funded to address the housing, education and other care needs of this cohort. Consequently, funded responses are often limited; they are focused on crisis responses, they do not meet state-wide demand and are unevenly distributed across the various States and territories. In short there are significant gaps in the mainstream and specialist service systems’ capacity (e.g. the poor access of this cohort to school, health and mental health services and to family supports and child protection), including the absence of a targeted, age-appropriate service that provides care and protection for these children outside of the Child Safety Service.
“If an animal requires urgent care in Tasmania there’s a number that you can call and a volunteer will come and collect it anytime day or night. Why is a similar service not available to vulnerable children in need of care?” Community Member – Southern Tasmania
33 NSW Ombudsman, More than shelter – addressing legal and policy gaps in supporting homeless children, June 2018, Available at: https://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/56133/More-than-shelter-addressing-legal-and-policy-gaps-in-supporting-homeless- children.pdf
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 25 of 115
Tasmania’s response to these children mirrors other states and territories and is no different in this regard. Recent research underlines the system level service and education issues faced by this cohort, including poor access to Child Safety, SHS services as well as education and health and well-being supports and limited capacity for co-ordinated responses to the multiple challenges and needs of these children.34 The ‘Service Models and Practice’ section discusses some of the issues and challenges facing SHS services in more detail, including some historical context relating to resourcing SHS services and services for children and young people at risk. Despite these challenges the Tasmanian government has invested a significant amount of funding across several inter-connected reforms that support the wellbeing of children, young people and their families. These reforms have considered the complexities associated with homelessness and other interconnected risk factors. In response to homelessness one quote from a young person consulted for the Youth at Risk Strategy described some of the issues they had with current short-term shelter model: “…shelters treat you like a child, are too controlling and tell you what to do but don’t listen to you. At bedtime they lock the doors. If you are younger you would need more security, but you still don’t need to be controlled….” The initiatives of the Taskforce build on, and bring together, actions within existing government reforms that target specific issues or needs of this vulnerable cohort. Examples of relevant reforms that have actions to address complex issues are outlined in Table 6.
34 (Robinson 2018;2018) PAGE 26 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Table 6. Government reforms and relevant actions to address the carelessness (the absence of care) and support needs of children under 16.
Reform/Strategy Relevant Actions
Youth at Risk o #4: Provide ongoing support for young people on bail and youth transitioning out Strategy (2017)35 of juvenile detention (Completed - ongoing funding secured for Save the Children: Bail Support and Support for young people transitioning from AYDC).
o #7: Review and improve the quality of transition planning and case planning across the child safety and youth justice systems. o #14: Provide trauma informed, multi-disciplinary support services within the Youth at Risk Response Centre (Completed - Colville Place in Southern Tasmania now operating; similar service to be built in Launceston). o #15 Explore new models for medium term housing options for under 16s. o #16 Investigate opportunities to enhance outreach housing and support options for young people living in rural and remote areas. o #17 Educate and raise awareness of housing pathways for vulnerable young people. Affordable Housing o Transitioning Tasmania’s three current youth supported accommodation facilities Strategy (2015- into Education-First Youth Foyers. 2025)36 o Establishing new Youth Foyers for older youth aged 16-25 years old in Burnie and Hobart and expanding the Youth Foyer in Launceston (Thyne House). Action Plan 2 (2019- o Working with Youth Family and Community Connections to replace their site for 2023) 37 homeless youth accommodation at Cooee to be co-located at the site of the new Burnie Youth Foyer. o Establishing a New Youth at Risk Centre in Launceston, similar to Colville Place in Moonah, to provide short-term homeless accommodation for vulnerable children and youth aged under 16 years old. Strong Families Safe o Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework Kids38 - Provides a common language and understanding of Child and Youth Wellbeing o Child Safety Service Redesign (Draft Service Delivery Model)39 - Discusses a joined-up response across Children and Youth Services for vulnerable young people. Potential development of a “Young People’s Team”
Out of Home Care o Extension of support for young people in OOHC until 21 years of age Foundations Strategy Review of Child and o A review of CAMHS has been recommended by the Mental Health Integration Adolescent Mental Taskforce. Health Services o Professor Brett McDermott has been appointed to undertake the review in early (CAMHS) 2020.
35 Tasmanian Government, Youth at Risk Strategy, June 2017 [online] Available at: https://www.communities.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0022/36373/CYS_Youth_at_Risk_Strategy_48pp_v8_LR.pdf 36 Tasmanian Government, Tasmania’s Affordable Housing Strategy 2015-2025, September 2015 [online] Available at: https://www.communities.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/30254/AHS_Strategy_Final.pdf 37 Tasmanian Government, Tasmania’s Affordable Housing Action Plan 2019-2023, March 2019 [online] Available at: https://www.communities.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0027/31698/TAH_Action-Plan-2019-2023.pdf 38 https://www.strongfamiliessafekids.tas.gov.au/ 39 Communities Tasmania, Model for Children and Youth Services in Tasmania: Child Safety Service Redesign Part One: A Service Delivery Model (Draft) UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 27 of 115
o Related to Action 15 in the Youth at Risk Strategy “Support and strengthen access to holistic youth focused mental health services for young people.” Reform Agenda for o Draft has been completed for Government consideration. Alcohol and other o Implementation planned for early 2020. Drugs Department of o Colleges and schools will provide Tier 3 flexible provision for students at risk of Education Student disengaging; Engagement Action o State-wide effective Tier 4 programs focused on re engaging students with Plan 2018 – 2020 mainstream education or training; o Increased provision for sector-based support in re engagement programs; and o All schools and colleges are actively supporting diversity and delivering high quality student engagement programs.
Initiatives such as the Tasmanian Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework are a step in the right direction, providing the foundation for a common understanding of what child and youth wellbeing is. This work enables services and the community to come together with a shared understanding and language that can drive programs, and service improvements to improve child wellbeing outcomes. However, as identified in the case studies in Appendix 6 and 7, system level failings continue. Reforms are not always adequate to meet the needs of specific cohorts and barriers to integrating remain. There is a need for increased collaboration and improved service realignment to improve the outcomes for our most vulnerable young people. A strong foundation and common understanding are required across government, non-government and the community. Other service reform concepts that have been taken into consideration by the Taskforce during the development of the short- and long-term are listed under three key action areas recommended by the Taskforce: Building a Strong Foundation • A responsive early intervention and prevention approach to identifying young people at risk that is currently being designed within the education service system. • The recent development of outcome assessment and reporting models and their adaption and adoption across service systems including the child wellbeing model. • An opportunity to build on the previous data sharing work in government with the Kids Come First initiative and more recently the creation of a shared data and information environment within the SHIP system to support client care across Housing Connect. • The development of interagency arrangements to address specific policy and strategy areas such as the family violence response that is being coordinated across government. Actions for children already known to services • Provide an immediate response (supplementing the existing service system if appropriate) which is aimed at identifying and advocating for the needs of children currently identified within the shelter system, who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, through the establishment of three pilot programs that address the most urgent structural gaps in each region. • The availability of co-location space within current services.
PAGE 28 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Redesign of the Service System • A concept of “turning off the tap” to higher cost services by developing and implementing strategies to keep people in their current homes wherever possible which is a key plank of the housing connect reforms. • A single coordinated referral and engagement point through the Strong Families Safe Kids hotline with aligned. • An opportunity to design and co-locate services to address particular client group needs which has recently been undertaken in supporting mental health consumers to access and be supported in maintain housing following discharge from acute and subacute care. • The recent alignment of the Reconnect service system in supporting early intervention for children in schools who are at risk of homelessness. • The design in the mental health service system of “step up and step down” services for people to support their diversion from high cost and often unnecessary acute care presentations which could be used as a concept for utilisation of youth at risk hubs for this purpose for young people exiting institutional care including juvenile justice and/or early intervention and prevention focussed respite from at risk home environments. • The development of prioritisation arrangements for more vulnerable and at-risk clients in the allocation of available social and affordable housing within the current housing service system. • The design of cohort specific service responses such as the rapid rehousing responses for ex-offenders and mental health consumers exiting institutional care. Service Models and Practice The current service models and practice appear to be largely focused on meeting the short-term accommodation needs of children, rather than providing a safe and stable care environment. Shortcomings with existing service models and practices are also driving, if not compounding this problem.
Analysis of service delivery models for this population point to a number of deficiencies:
• Crisis driven and short term; Crisis shelters provide young people with a short-term crisis response to address their accommodation needs. These shelters provide 6-12 weeks of accommodation while the young person is assisted to reconnect with their family or transition into longer term accommodation options. These shelters are often gender specific, usually do not allow couples or young people with children or pets, or those who may be under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Crisis shelters also cater to a wide age range of young people from 13-20 years. This mix of younger teens with young adults raises several issues and is often a challenge for shelters. Although shelters are able to provide short term accommodation for young people from the age of 13 years in Tasmania, the current one worker model within crisis accommodation does not allow these services to provide the level of support these younger age groups require.
• Limited capacity to work with the family; There are a number of family focused programs exist in Tasmania such as the Integrated Family Support Service (IFSS) and Intensive Family Engagement Service (IFES). These services work with families at varied levels of intensity and complexity, however, capacity is limited. Reconnect is available for young people as an early intervention service to help them reconcile and work through issues with their family. However, the focus of the service is on the young person and does not address parental issues, often there is difficulty engaging with parents or other family members who do not wish to participate in family counselling or a reunification process. There is a clear demand for additional services that can work intensively with UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 29 of 115
children, young people and their families in their home to build on their strengths, assist them to resolve conflict, and to maintain regular communication to ensure sustained progress once conflict has been resolved. Such services would be particularly useful for families who are struggling with chronic issues such as family conflict, mental illness or addiction.
• Focused on managing children’s immediate problems and needs rather than their broader wellbeing and care; Homeless young people often present with a range of complex issues that require support across many service areas. Conditions may be pre-existing and contribute to a young person’s entry into homelessness, however homelessness can increase the risk of some conditions or exacerbate them. An innovative program that has been developed and piloted in Tasmania is the Lead Coordination Service. This service provides service co-ordination for clients with multiple and complex needs, using a lead co-ordinator who works with the client to identify and achieve their goals. The Service has been trialled for both adults and young people, with promising results.
• Under resourced services, preventing capacity to address care needs; Most crisis accommodation within Tasmania operates under a one worker model. This is fraught with difficulties for children in the younger age group who require higher care levels and supervision. Greater consistency in service provision and incorporation of quality standards within Tasmanian shelters would help to ensure that service models are delivering the standard of care required for this cohort and are regularly monitored. South Australia has developed the Australian Service Excellence Standards40 for community organisations which, along with the National Principles for Child Safe Organisations41, are being used by NSW to determine the appropriateness of their youth homelessness services. The National Principles have been endorsed by all State and Territory Governments and are expected to provide a foundation for mandatory standards for services to children and young people in the near future.
• Difficulty caring for very vulnerable children particularly those experiencing problems with mental health, drug and alcohol and anger management. Supportive ‘no-barrier’ accommodation is currently not available for young people in Tasmania, but arguably is needed for the most marginalised young people presenting to services with multiple complex issues such as alcohol and drug addictions, mental health issues, disabilities and involvement with the criminal justice system. Flexible no barrier models such as Housing First and Rapid Re-housing, have been adapted to meet the developmental needs of younger cohorts of youth and have shown promising results internationally.42
• Accommodation and related supports only exist in inner-suburban areas. Currently accommodation options and related supports for children under 16 experiencing or at risk of homelessness only exist in five of the states 29 Local Government Areas (Hobart, Glenorchy, Launceston, Devonport and Burnie). There is currently no accommodation
40 Government of South Australia, Department of Human Services, Australian Service Excellence Standards (ASES)-Third Edition (Version 5); https://www.qip.com.au/standards/australian-service-excellence-standards-ases/ 41 https://childsafe.humanrights.gov.au/ 42 Gaetz, Stephen. (2017). THIS is Housing First for Youth: A Program Model Guide. Toronto: Canadian Observatory on Homelessness Press; https://www.homelesshub.ca/sites/default/files/COH-AWH-HF4Y.pdf (accessed 21/05/19) PAGE 30 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
provision (including crisis accommodation) for children outside of these areas, this is particularly concerning for children in very remote and regional areas such as the West Coast, Circular Head, Glenmorgan-Spring Bay, Break O‘Day, Central Highlands, Dorset, Flinders and King Islands, where travel times prevent children accessing existing services, and limited public transport options.
• Lack of effective links with public education and health providers. Physical and mental health problems are both a cause and effect of homelessness. Children who are homeless have higher rates of asthma, recurrent ear infections, vision problems, eczema and developmental delays. People who are homeless experience significantly higher rates of disability and chronic illness than the general population. Children who are homeless are also more likely to leave school than children who have adequate housing. Two in every three young people who become homeless leave school within 12 months43. More could be done to by education and health care providers in identifying these children earlier and collaborating with service providers to ensure the necessary supports are available when they are experiencing homelessness. Consultations with young people highlighted the barriers they faced when accessing services. These included an ‘inability to access services because they were full, or the young person did not meet the eligibility requirements’ and a ‘lack of knowledge and information available about services.’ ‘Safety at services’ was also a key issue for young people.
The evolution of historical service models may assist to explain some of the deficiencies within current service models and practice, for example, crisis accommodation was initially established to accommodate 15 to 24-year old’s, not children under 15 who have additional care requirements. While the need for care (not just accommodation) has been increasing, crisis shelter resources for case management have retracted since the establishment of Housing Connect which resulted in a more centralised approach to managing those experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness who are aged 16 and above. During the establishment of Housing Connect it should also be noted that the Targeted Youth Support Service and Supported Youth Program funding was halved (approximately $800k), with funding for these case coordination/case management services (that cater for ages 10-17) redirected to Housing Connect, who only work with young people aged 16 years or older. What is Happening Elsewhere? A jurisdictional and international scan of accommodation programs and approaches for homeless young people was undertaken to identify what options currently exist for young people across the homelessness continuum. A snapshot of highly visible programs that have been evaluated and shown to be effective, or those which are otherwise innovative and/or show promise are detailed in Appendix 7.44
43 https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/letstalkaboutrights/downloads/HRA_homeless.pdf 44 It should be noted that across all jurisdictions there was a considerable lack of options for young people aged under 16, especially within medium to long term accommodation solutions. Some of the models presented in Appendix 7 are currently only available for young people over 16 years; but they are included for completeness – and to generate thinking around modification of some of these models for younger cohorts (which has successfully been undertaken in Canada and the USA for Rapid Housing and the Housing First approach). UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 31 of 115
Critical Service System Elements
After consideration of best practice research and feedback provided during the consultation process, the Taskforce identified eight ‘critical service system elements’ required to better respond to unaccompanied children under 16 in Tasmania.
The problem of under 16 ‘carelessness’ (the absence of care), is a multifaceted and complex problem that requires a multifaceted solution. The Taskforce does not believe that the problem can be solved without addressing each of the following elements:
Each of these elements, including their importance, their use within the current service system and future opportunities are discussed in more detail in the following section.
PAGE 32 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Authority and Accountability Why is this important? Accountabilities of Ministers portfolios and associated Government Agencies are ultimately founded in the will of Parliament as expressed through legislation. Legislation can define principles for how services are to be delivered, provide the authorities to act (or to not act), and establish clearly defined mechanisms for accountability. Supporting the wellbeing of children by creating a care environment outside of the family is complex, involving a broad array of services and decisions to be made on behalf of the child. Doing this well requires a clear source of authority in terms of who is responsible for the child, clear process for empowering services and strong accountabilities for ensuring that actions are in the interest of the child, and that support is available when and where it is required. A lack of legislative clarity and policy direction for supporting the wellbeing of unaccompanied children results in ambiguity regarding who has responsibility for their wellbeing. This can lead to vulnerable children falling between legislative, policy and service gaps, causing them to become a hidden problem, with nobody ultimately being accountable for their welfare. At the service level, a lack of clarity around the authority to make decision on behalf of young people leaves services vulnerable, or young people without the capacity to make the decisions necessary for their every day care. Without clearly defined service obligations and standards, funding for specialist homelessness services and associated support services do not include the resources required to respond to the complex problems that unaccompanied homeless children present with. Consequently, funded responses are often limited; they are focused on crisis responses, they are unable to address the underlying drivers of carelessness (the absence of care). The provision of a clear authorising environment, with defined and enforceable accountabilities, ensures vulnerable children who are homeless do not fall through the gaps between services and that there is ultimately some who is accountable for ensuring their wellbeing. Current Response Tasmania currently has a lack of legislative clarity and policy direction for supporting the wellbeing of unaccompanied children. There are also no overarching principles or standards to safeguard the care and protection of unaccompanied children. There is no official policy position for this cohort within or across services and the issue of who has duty of care, and who can legally provide consent for these children, in the absence of a parent of or legal guardian, is also unresolved. The issues surrounding consent also impact on an unaccompanied child’s ability to access appropriate identification, such as birth certificates, Medicare cards and student identification. These forms of identification usually require a parent or guardians’ consent. A failure to secure these types of identification can lead to problems in, for example, enrolling in education and training, attending doctors’ appointments, securing Government entitlements.
“Help young people to get ID – you can't do anything without it (you can't get a bank account, money, bus pass)” Homeless Child
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 33 of 115
Tasmanian Legislation Although there have been attempts to incorporate child wellbeing statements into Tasmanian legislation, in general these are broad, overarching statements that lack enforceability and hold nobody to account. The Children, Young Persons and their Families Act, 1997 states that the family has the primary responsibility for the care, upbringing and development of the child and is entitled to be treated with respect at all times. The act also provides, however, that the Tasmanian government is responsible for safeguarding the wellbeing of children and assisting families to bring up their children in a way that enhances their wellbeing. Section 10B – Responsibility of Government The Tasmanian Government has responsibility for promoting and safeguarding the wellbeing of children and, if required, assisting families in fulfilling their responsibilities for the care, upbringing and development of their children. As noted previously, the actions require to support this obligation are clear when the circumstances warrant the removal of the child from the family, and the transfer of guardianship and/or custody to the State. It is not clear, however, how this statutory obligation translates into an appropriate service response for safeguarding the wellbeing of children that are outside of this statutory system. Shelters have also expressed their concern around their inability to consent to things such as medical treatment or school enrolment on behalf of an unaccompanied child who presents to a shelter. The ability to consent on behalf of an unaccompanied children who is not on a statutory order rests with the parent, even if the child has left the family home and is not in contact with their family. Shelters have also expressed their concern around ‘duty of care’ for children who are sharing shelter accommodation with much older residents who have multiple complex needs and present potential risks to a younger cohort. Other Jurisdictions There is no jurisdiction within Australia that has introduced legislation to address the needs of unaccompanied homeless children under the age of 16 years. However, most jurisdictions have developed policy responses or practice guidelines around how to best support unaccompanied children who present to homeless shelters. Policies include the NSW policy for Unaccompanied Children and Young People 12-15 Years Accessing Specialist Homelessness Services45 which highlights responsibilities between shelters and child protection and provides processes for identifying the lead for response and pathways for collaboration; the Queensland policy for Supporting Young People Under 16 Years of Age: Guidelines for Good Practice for Specialist Homelessness Services (updated May 2018)46 which has a focus on legal and ethical considerations facing SHS in providing supported accommodation to unaccompanied u16s and the Western Australian Practice Guidelines 47 which identify how Child Protection Workers can provide co-ordination of protection and support to at risk homeless young people. Jurisdictions have found that even with these policies and guidelines in place legal and policy gaps still exist around decision making authority, accountability and duty of care issues for this cohort of children. This includes obtaining consent for important decisions around things such as medical care and enrolment
45 NSW Government, Family and Community Services, Unaccompanied Children and Young People 12-15 Years Accessing Specialist Homelessness Services Policy; [online] Available at: http://www.housing.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0011/369515/Unaccompanied-Children-and-Young- People-12-15-Years-Accessing-SHS-Policy....pdf 46 Queensland Government, Supporting Young People Under 16 Years of Age: Guidelines for Good Practice for Specialist Homelessness Services; http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/supporting-young-people-under-16years-of-age-guidelines-for-good-practice-for-specialist- homelessnessservices.pdf 47 Western Australia, Child Protection Practice Guidelines; https://manuals.dcp.wa.gov.au/CPM/SitePages/Procedure.aspx?ProcedureId=203#1548
PAGE 34 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE within education. A report by the NSW Ombudsman in June 2018, highlighted the legal and policy gaps that exist for this cohort.48 The Ombudsman’s report concluded that if a current care and protection order was not in place for an unaccompanied child under the age of 16, then the decision-making authority remains with the child’s parents, even if the child has no or minimal contact with their parents. One of the key recommendations from the Ombudsman’s report was that the NSW government pursue legislative amendments to resolve this issue. There appears to be a lack of specific legislation internationally that addresses the wellbeing needs of unaccompanied homeless children. Some states within the USA, most notably Hawaii, have introduced specific legislation around the provision of crisis shelter for minors. A more recent legislative rights-based approach to homelessness has occurred in Wales and Canada. This approach creates an obligation for governments to target the systemic causes of homelessness and not just react once people are homeless. It holds all areas of government responsible for their role in preventing people from becoming homeless. The Housing (Wales) Act 2014 incorporates ‘Duty to Assist’ provisions and provides a human rights based, positive pathway framework that doesn’t look at housing and homelessness in isolation to the rest of a person’s life. The legislation ensures that public bodies have a legal obligation to assist a person who is at risk of homelessness or homeless, with young people considered as a priority group for assistance. There are also provisions in the legislation to ensure that everybody discharged from a public institution (including Out of Home Care and Youth Custodial Settings) has a sustainable housing solution when exited.
48 NSW Ombudsman, More than shelter – addressing legal and policy gaps in supporting homeless children, June 2018, Available at: https://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/56133/More-than-shelter-addressing-legal-and-policy-gaps-in-supporting-homeless- children.pdf UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 35 of 115
Information Collection, Sharing and Collaboration
Why is this important?
Understanding the nature of the problem is an essential component of designing a solution. It is important, therefore, to have robust data collection processes that deliver a clear view of the extent of homelessness or risk among children in our community, the geographic distribution of these issues and the causes. It is also important that the service network is well-positioned to share information, and to collaborate in design solutions, both at the individual and service level, while also recognising the need to balance a young person’s right to privacy and their ability to provide informed consent to collect or share their information It has been well established through research and the recent consultation process that children under 16 who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness are more likely to become disengaged from education, suffer abuse and neglect, be impacted by family violence and breakdown, have poor health outcomes and come into contact with police and the criminal justice system. No one government agency or community sector organisation, can address this type of home-lessness without addressing the broader problem of carelessness (the absence of care). Making this a shared problem between multiple government agencies, the community sector, parents and carers. Impediments to information sharing make it difficult to determine the exact size and nature of the problem that needs to be addressed and impacts on the ability of Government and Community Sector organisations to collaborate to improve the outcomes and wellbeing of vulnerable children.
“We need closer information exchange between the family, government services and external providers and schools to provide more holistic solutions.” Community Member- Southern Tasmania
This lack of communication results in reduced productivity through the duplication and double handling of Homeless Child information, more expensive and less effective outcomes due to limited or no information exchange across Government and Community Sector organisations and significant intergenerational costs to Government over the life course of the child. Lack of information sharing also inhibits effective early intervention and prevention strategies. Agencies should identify suitable and sensitive ways to identify young people at risk of homelessness as a key enabler to early intervention. There is also a growing amount of research that highlights the many benefits of co-designing services49, some of these include, improvements to idea generation, service design, project management and more successful services over the long term, resulting in benefits for consumers and organisations. Current Response There are a range of initiatives that have been or are being implemented across Government that provide valuable insights into mechanisms to share information and collaborate for the benefits of children, young people their families. Examples include the Safe Home, Safe Families coordination unit, the Strong Families
49 VicHealth, Website accessed 2019, How co-design delivers agency, advocacy and real world impact; Steen, M., Manschot, M., & De Koning, N. (2011). Benefits of co-design in service design projects. International Journal of Design PAGE 36 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Safe Kids Advice and Referral Line and the Lead Coordination Service. There remain, however, many examples of services across Government and the non-government sector that are relatively isolated, in that they do not routinely communicate or share information with other services. There is currently no whole of Government data collection and information sharing framework for vulnerable children and young people. In addition, the current service system does not prioritise service responses to those who are the most vulnerable or who need the most urgent responses having regard to their broad wellbeing needs. This adds additional layers of complexity to facilitating a service response to children and families/carers that are already under immense pressure. There is little evidence to suggest that government effectively co-designs services with service users and the community sector. Much more could be done to improve the co-design process. In 2019 the Department of Communities released Youth Matter – A practical guide to increase youth engagement and participation in Tasmania. This document provides a number of useful resources that can be used to promote co-design with children and young people. The Department of Education is exploring the possibilities of a report that will collect and provide data regarding young people who are transient (homeless) through SSS. This will enable an evidence based approach to support early intervention and also provide other Departments with data to make appropriate provision for current and future needs including access and placement in shelters and access to the relevant community based supports.
“Don’t give up on us, listen to us and let us have a voice.” Homeless Child
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 37 of 115
Place Based Flexible Service Provision Why is this important? Place is important as it is where we live, raise our families, work, where children attend school, where people connect with others and access services when required. A shared sense of place can unite people, and place-based approaches make the most of these connections. Place-based approaches can address complex problems by making families and communities more engaged, connected and resilient.50 Complex problems, such as homelessness, are beyond the capacity of anyone organisation to address. By integrating services and building more supportive communities we can have a positive influence on a person’s social and physical environment. Place based approaches join up the efforts of all stakeholders (community, industry, business, NGOs and government) to improve the social, economic and physical wellbeing of a defined geographical location. They can reduce the impact of social disadvantage at the local level, decrease barriers to accessing services and help to prevent the cycle of intergenerational disadvantage.51 Types of place-based approaches include collective impact, place specific approaches (e.g. Community hubs and partnerships) and place-sensitive approaches. Current Response There are currently few examples of place based flexible service provision for children under 16 experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness in Tasmania. Child and Family Centres and Neighbourhood houses are examples of services available in Tasmanian communities that are place based and offer flexible service provision. Collective impact initiatives such as Burnie Works are one type of place-based approach used to respond to complex communities and social disadvantage. Key aspects of collective impact include, a shared agenda, mutually reinforcing activities to achieve significant and lasting social change. The Burnie Works program aims to address long term and entrenched issues in the community and achieve goals such as making Burnie a caring, inclusive, smart, sustainable and vibrant place. The Department of Education’s Collective Ed program and the State Governments Strategic Growth framework are two further examples of place-based initiatives that may be relevant to identifying local solutions for children that are homeless. During the consultation process concerns were raised regarding inconsistent and inequitable access to accommodation and support services in remote and regional areas, these issues were compounded by a lack of transport options making it difficult for children or young people to access these services outside of these areas. Feedback received also suggested insufficient access to supports for parents with teenage children who have behavioural problems, a lack of life skills training and mentors for children under 16; no residential rehabilitation or support for children with mental health or substance addictions; a lack of secondary level mental health services; inconsistent and inequitable adolescent health services; inequitable access to transition programs for children exiting detention in the North and North West; and insufficient capacity in case management and case coordination services and bail support services.
50 The Royal Children’s Hospital, Centre for Community Child Health, Policy Brief – Place-base approaches to supporting children and families, Issue 23 (2011). 51 Queensland Government, Department of Communities, Disability Services and Seniors, “Framework for Place-Based Approaches”
PAGE 38 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Improved Wellbeing and Outcome
Measurements
Why is this important? The Tasmanian Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework explains that wellbeing influences the way that children and young people interact with other people and their environment. When a child has a strong sense of wellbeing, they will be more resilient and more able to approach their interactions with others in a positive and optimistic way. They will learn better, be healthier, happier and more confident. One of the main aims of the Strong Families, Safe Kids redesign of the Tasmanian child safety system is to place the wellbeing of Tasmania’s children and young people at the centre of everything we do. All parts of the system need to focus on support for children, young people, families and communities to promote improved wellbeing, prevent problems before they occur, and intervene early when problems start to escalate. The redesign recognises that the statutory child safety system is only one small part of this broader network of services. The absence of outcome indicators and baseline data to measure outcomes makes it impossible to determine with accuracy whether policy and program responses are effective. Improved client outcome measurements can also assist to inform the design and delivery of services, and in turn, for agencies and the community sector to be held accountable for delivering improved wellbeing for children and young people, via the measurement of progress against key indicators. Current Response As discussed under Information Sharing and Collaboration, many systems across Government Agencies and Departments within Agencies don’t communicate with each other. This lack of information sharing, and collaboration has resulted in no consistent state-wide approach or standards for working with children under 16 years. Currently each provider is responsible for developing their own standards and principles in relation to working with under 16s. The Department of Communities Tasmania, in collaboration with other Agencies is developing a range of population outcomes and indicators that will measure child and youth wellbeing. Consideration is also being given to how more targeted program specific outcomes that can be measured and shared to help support future place-based initiatives.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 39 of 115
Early Intervention and Support Why is this important? Through early identification of risks within a family environment, and early intervention to reduce those risks, it has been shown that we can improve family preservation and reduce the flow of young people entering homelessness52 . In order to intervene early, before issues reach a crisis point and usually before an unaccompanied child presents to a shelter, we need to be able to identify, at an early stage, the signs that a child may be at risk in their family home. Early identification of the key drivers of homelessness (family violence and conflict, school disengagement) can assist families and young people to access early supports and help to prevent young people from entering homelessness or statutory systems. Research on young people who have experienced homelessness identified that 56% of young people sampled first left home because of family violence, with the median age of first leaving home being 10 years of age. 53 Family violence programs that can identify families who are struggling and provide early support for the family and young person, as well as family mediation services, may assist this younger cohort to stay at home and avoid intervention from statutory services. Investment in early identification and prevention of homelessness can have a large economic benefit through reduced costs to government over the life course of a young person. A research briefing by Mackenzie et al. noted that “If 5% of young people entering the homelessness system each year were diverted from becoming homeless at the outset, then the saving…..in reduced health and justice services and Specialist Homelessness Services usage would be approximately $60m annually”.54
In the Reducing Youth Homelessness report Tasmanian young people identified the following early interventions and supports that would have helped them to stay at home:
• Support and early intervention for families • Parenting support • Support from extended family and friends • Support to stay engaged with school • More effective Child Protection Services and support when placements weren’t working • Access to Mental Health programs (for parents and/or young person)
Many of the young people in the report would have preferred to stay at home with supports bought into the home rather than having to leave. However, for some young people remaining in the home is not a safe option. Other jurisdictions have embraced place-based school programs that utilise population screening approaches. Evidence shows that there is a strong linkage between early school leaving and entry into youth homelessness. Identifying and stabilising a situation while a young person is still linked to school enables quick intervention by services and can decrease escalation of a family crisis.55 Programs such as the
52 Commonwealth of Australia (2008) The Road Home: A National Approach to Reducing Homelessness [online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/cm/lb/4895838/data/the-road-home---a-national-approach-to-reducing-homelessness-data.pdf 53 Flatau, P, Thielking, M., MacKenzie, D & Steen, A (2015) The Australian youth homeless experience: evidence from a longitudinal survey of homeless youth. Parity 28:3, 5. 54 MacKenzie D, Flatau P, Steen A, Thielking M (2016) The Cost of Youth Homelessness in Australia: Research Briefing. 55 National Alliance to end Homelessness, Ending Homelessness for Unaccompanied Minor Youth, December 2015; https://endhomelessness.org/resource/ending-homelessness-for-unaccompanied-minor-youth/ (accessed 28 May 2015) PAGE 40 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Geelong “COSS” model undertake population screening of young people (12-17 years) within local schools to identify those young people with risk factors that may put them at risk of homelessness, allowing supports and early intervention to be put into place. Evaluation of the Geelong Project showed a significant effect of the program in preventing homelessness with a 40% reduction in young people entering the Specialist Homelessness Service over a three-year period, it also provided evidence of improvement in school engagement and a reduction in early school leaving. The collective approach of this program is innovative in its design as it links government agencies and support services and allows for community driven solutions. 56 Current Response It was identified through the consultation process that there are limited ways to identify children under 16 who are at risk before they reach a crisis point. Identification of children at risk usually occurs upon presentation to services, usually following a crisis (e.g. homeless, mental health issue, family violence incident, notification to Child Safety Services). This is too late for the child and increases the challenges associated with addressing the underlying issues that allow the child to remain at home. Children under 16 who are homeless or at risk of homelessness are of mandatory school age. Schools therefore provide the perfect placed based opportunity for early identification processes to be undertaken. The following assessments are already undertaken within Tasmanian public schools to assess and identify the wellbeing, development and other potential risk factors that a student may have: • Wellbeing Surveys in schools provides an opportunity to focus attention on schools or regions where there is a prevalence of factors that may increase the likelihood of homelessness for children. • Absenteeism and Naplan results can provide an early indication/raise red flags that a child may be more likely to disengage from school and be at risk of homelessness. • Child Wellbeing Teams and school social workers currently work across schools to identify and meet the wellbeing needs of children and young people. There are, however, significant capacity constraints that prevent school social workers from building the ongoing relationship and support networks for all children at risk of homelessness. • School nurses currently work across targeted primary and secondary schools and provide a preventative and health promotion role and assist in early detection of health and wellbeing issues in children and young people. Historically early intervention programs for youth homelessness have been focussed on family reconciliation through mediation and counselling once a young person has become homeless or is at significant risk of homelessness. Currently in Tasmania Reconnect is one of the only early intervention programs focussed on family mediation and counselling, aimed specifically at preventing homelessness and family reunification. Intervention usually occurs after a child has become homeless or when they are at a high risk of homelessness. • Reconnect: Colony 47, Relationships Australia o A free service for 12-18-year old’s who are homeless/at risk of homelessness o Helps young people reconnect with their family, education, employment and in the community through mediation and counselling
56Mackenzie, D., Thieking, M., (2013) The Geelong Project: A community of schools and youth services model for early intervention, Swinburne Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University [online] Available at: http://www.thegeelongproject.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/The- Geelong-Project-FAHCSIA1.pdf
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 41 of 115
o Evaluation of Reconnect has found that young people in the program demonstrated positive outcomes in relation to control over their lives, housing permanency and improved relationships within their family and the community.57 It was identified through the consultation process that there are limited ways to identify children under 16 who are at risk before they reach a crisis point. This problem is compounded by insufficient numbers of School Social Workers to cater for children experiencing problems. Once issues are identified there is a belief that the state lacks consistent state-wide family reunification services and community centres or programs that support children under 16 and their families. Feedback obtained through the consultation process also identified that some families are unable to secure fit for purpose housing, which places additional stresses on families that are already experiencing significant stress.
57 Mission Australia, (2016) Reconnect Evaluation 2016, Accessible at: https://www.missionaustralia.com.au/documents/687-reconnect-evaluation- report/file PAGE 42 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Assessment, Referral and Triage Why is this important? Centralised or single point access programs have been developed to help people navigate complex systems. Centralised intake provides easier and faster access to information and supports for clients and utilise resources more efficiently. It usually involves a common and co-ordinated assessment process which includes centralisation of client information which is then available to multiple service providers. This helps to ensure services are less fragmented and access to services is more seamless. Co-ordinated assessment can also help to divert clients from services by enabling preventative and early interventions for clients before their risk factors escalate into a crisis. If marketed appropriately, a single intake point is easy for clients to remember and enables clients to be prioritised and referred to appropriate services based on their individual needs. It can provide more timely information, supports and referrals for clients to a range of services and is especially useful for clients with multiple and complex needs as it ensures consistency of assessment processes, reduces duplication and helps to ensure that referrals are made to appropriate services who are able to share relevant client information and work more collaboratively. For agencies a single point of assessment, triage and referral can provide a rich source of data on the type of client referrals, client needs, reduce duplication of services, promote efficiencies in service provision and support interagency collaboration. Current Response The current advice and referral processes for unaccompanied children is ad-hoc, with no single assessment or referral point, currently children under 16 experiencing or at risk of homelessness could be referred to shelters directly, through Housing Connect or through the SFSK Advice and Referral Service. During the consultation process many service providers and young people raised a lack of understanding regarding what options currently exist, and some young people are afraid to seek out help, fearing more rejection. The absence of a single contact point for children under 16 to call if they need advice or are in crisis was also raised as a barrier to children and young people accessing services. The Strong Families, Safe Kids Referral Line provides a single point of advice and referral for children and young people at risk. The service provides a ‘gateway’ for referral to support services, and a point of escalation through to the Child Safety Service. The Advice and Referral Line is a partnership between Government (Child Safety Service) and non-government community-based intake services.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 43 of 115
Safe and Stable Care Environment
Why is this important? The Australian Institute of Family Studies identified that having a stable living arrangement helps children to maintain their relationships with friends and service providers and remain engaged with school and community activities. In contrast, instability in living arrangements can have significant adverse effects on children. Studies have found that continued instability is associated with poor educational, employment, social and psychological outcomes, as well as behavioral and emotional problems (Australian Institute of Family Studies, Chapin Hall Center for Children University of Chicago, & NSW Department of Family and Community Services, 2015). Experiencing multiple care environments can also affect a young person’s capacity to develop and maintain relationships58. The Department of Health and Human Services USA, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control states in their Essentials for Childhood policy document state that safe, stable, nurturing relationships and environments are essential to prevent early adversity, including child abuse and neglect, and to assure that all children reach their full potential. Children who experience child abuse and neglect or adverse childhood experiences have an increased tendency to engage in risky behaviours in adolescence and can have increased health problems as adults. These problems may include alcohol abuse, depression, drug abuse (including opioids), eating disorders, obesity, sexually transmitted diseases, smoking, suicide, violence towards others, and many chronic diseases59. The NSW Homeless Youth Assistance Program (HYAP), which funds non-government service providers to deliver support and accommodation for unaccompanied children and young people aged 12 to 15, identifies in their Service Delivery Framework that unaccompanied children and young people require an enhanced level of supervision and case management during periods of homelessness, when compared to other homelessness clients. Effective supported accommodation responses for unaccompanied children and young people include the following core components: • Provision of supported accommodation in a caring, safe and nurturing environment while the child or young person’s homelessness is resolved. • Provision of trauma-informed, client-centred case management to mitigate the impacts of the immediate crisis and ensure the safety and wellbeing of unaccompanied children and young people. • Fully supervised service model (24/7) with appropriate supervision and staff-to-client ratios in order to meet duty of care requirements for unaccompanied children and young people. • Establishment of strong local partnerships to facilitate wraparound service responses that meet the immediate needs of clients and address underlying causes of homelessness. • Provision of support to enable the child or young person to access suitable support services to meet their individual needs and build capacity. • Collaboration with the individual to facilitate family reconnection, where this is appropriate. This will include considering alternative living arrangements, such as with relatives, carers or wider support networks. • Delivery of strengths-based interventions that act to build the capacity, self-esteem and skills of unaccompanied children and young people.
58 Australian Government, Australian Institute of Family Studies, CFCA Resource Sheet – Sept 2018 59 The Department of Health and Human Services USA, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control states in their Essentials for Childhood PAGE 44 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
• Provision of continuity of care to ensure strong, trusting relationships can be established between clients and case workers. • Provision of follow-up post-crisis support to individuals when their immediate support and accommodation needs have been met. The Lighthouse model is a long-term accommodation model that provides a young person with a home and tailored, therapeutic support.60 Suburban houses are utilised for up to four young people and 2 live-in carers, supported by a team of psychologists and health professionals. Currently this model is utilised in Victoria for young people over the age of 16, however with some modifications could be utilised for a younger cohort. Internationally, Canada utilise “Host Homes”61 within local communities for young people aged 14-26 who are homeless. Young people are matched with a host who provides them with a home-like environment and acts as a mentor for the young person. The program provides the young person with a safe, temporary home, diverts them from the shelter system and enables them space to work with support services to reunify with family or work towards longer term housing solutions. This model has been proven to be a cost-effective way of providing young people with a home, while also enabling them to stay within their community and maintain their schooling, friendships and other networks. The use of this model to address the needs of young people in regional areas has potential. Current Response While crisis shelters, Colville Place, the Out of Home Care System (for young people on orders) and Ashley Youth Detention Centre (for young people on remand/custodial orders), provide some short-term accommodation and care for children under 16, additional age appropriate placements are required to meet existing demand. Currently there are no safe places outside of business hours for unaccompanied children under 16 to access, excluding Colville Place, no crisis care and accommodation for children under 13, children in remote or regional areas, children with multiple and complex needs, young people on bail or exiting detention. There is also minimal short-term respite for families or young people that are experiencing challenges and are not on statutory orders. Kennerley is one of the only providers in Tasmania that offers short term (1-2 days) community respite for families in Southern Tasmania who are not involved with Child Safety Service. In addition to the gaps that exist for crisis care and accommodation, there is also an absence of medium to long term care and accommodation options for children under 15, who are not on orders, where an OOHC placement has broken down, those exiting detention and young mums. During consultations it was suggested that children on orders are being placed or transitioned to inappropriate or no accommodation and that children are being held in custody due to insufficient bail accommodation options, which is also consistent with previous consultation findings in the Youth at Risk Strategy.
Shelter screening was also raised as a barrier for the most vulnerable children accessing care and accommodation, which was consistent with a number of shelters suggesting difficulties with the current one worker model, particularly relating to risk and safety of other residents and the lack of support services that provide outreach to children in shelters.
“Shelters ban kids rather than helping them overcome their problems”
Homeless Child – Southern Tasmania
60 Lighthouse Foundation; http://lighthousefoundation.org.au/
61 Host Homes Canada; https://www.hosthomes.org/ UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 45 of 115
Other system related concerns that were raised by stakeholders included: limited to no access to finances; Government payments for children under 16 being hard to obtain; unaccompanied children with no or limited financial means are being placed in debt due to an accumulation of fines; difficulties getting children assessed for disabilities; a perceived negative bias for children of families who are known to police and a lack of clear understanding or process for the reengagement of children that have been excluded from mainstream education providers.
PAGE 46 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Governance Why is this important? A clear authoritative process and environment provides the mechanism within government to drive system level reform. It also ensures there is a high level of accountability for outcomes and actions within a project. This is especially important for projects or reforms that are tackling complex problems and require interagency collaboration and action to achieve results. Current Response Currently Tasmania reforms within the Department of Communities, such as Strong Families Safe Kids, the Affordable Housing Strategy and the Youth at Risk Strategy all have different governance processes and varied levels of reporting and accountability back to government. An example of a collaborative and co-ordinated governance approach that is currently in place for a system wide reform in Tasmania can be found within the Safe Homes, Safe Families approach to family violence. Since its inception in 2015, this reform has attracted significant investment by Government, is driven by and accountable to a Family Violence Cabinet Committee, made up of the Premier and relevant Ministers who are responsible for high level decision making. A cross-agency steering committee comprising of Heads of Agencies and Deputy Secretaries report on the delivery of Actions back to Cabinet; and this is supported by a Cross-Agency working group who are responsible for the implementation of the Actions as well as a Family Violence Consultative group made up of key non-government stakeholders who are able to provide expert advice to inform government responses. This structure and co-ordinated approach have shown that strong leadership, appropriate resourcing and high-level accountability across Agencies provide a strong foundation for driving reforms.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 47 of 115
Next Steps
The Taskforce acknowledges that many actions detailed in this advice require additional development and that over the long term, co-design of a redesigned service sector needs to occur with Government, Community Sector, parents/carers and unaccompanied children who are under 16. Given the complexities and level of strategic thinking and engagement required to progress these actions, the Taskforce recommends that the Tasmanian Government establish a project team within the Department of Communities Tasmania to manage the implementation process.
Proposed initiatives that have been recommended for the ‘Next Steps’ are outlined in more detail in the next section of this advice. These have been grouped under three key action areas, which include: Proposed Immediate Initiatives (Next 12 Months)
Action for known Children 1. Immediately establish a point of authority and accountability for responding to the immediate needs of children under 16 that are unaccompanied. 2. The piloting of Care Teams to provide an integrated triage and assessment system which is based on the child and youth wellbeing framework. 3. Increase capacity across the current service system to undertake individualised case coordination/case management and advocacy (including after hours) for children under 16 who are currently known to services across the three regions of Tasmania. 4. Scope the utilisation of existing services such as the Strong Families Safe Kids Advice and Referral Service or Housing Connect as the single assessment, referral and triage point for unaccompanied children under the age of 16 years, including training staff to provide a response and educating the community on the broader role of this service. 5. Take immediate action to integrate the response for these children across existing service systems based on the six domains of wellbeing, including consideration of appropriate models of co- location.
Building a Solid Foundation 6. Government endorsement of the guiding principles (Appendix 8) created by the Taskforce, which will help inform any future policy development. 7. Establishment of a policy design group that will consist of representatives from government, consumers and the sector. 8. Continued promotion of the Child and Youth Wellbeing Framework, and finalisation of the Outcomes Framework for Child and Youth Wellbeing. 9. Agreement on appropriate governance and reporting requirements for implementation of Taskforce recommendations.
Service System Redesign 10. Commit to a co-design of the service system with relevant Government agencies, the sector, peak bodies, young people and their families for each aspect of a new service system model. 11. Commit to funding of a secretariat that is dedicated to the codesign and implementation of the redesigned service system.
PAGE 48 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Proposed Long-Term Initiatives
Action for known Children 12. Identify specific service requirements for communities, for example, family support services that build on strengths and focus on family preservation, co-designed 24/7 response centre/support hubs, crisis, medium to long term care, outreach housing and supports, etc. 13. Pilot a child centred and co-ordinated case management service system that is based on the child case and care plans and tracked through an appropriately designed case management system. 14. Identify place-based services/initiatives that could be prioritised across each region (including remote and regional Tasmania).
Building a Solid Foundation 15. The policy design group will focus on aligning the legislative, regulatory and service responses. This would include: • Review and provision of advice to the Minister on the legislative and regulatory mechanisms available to make the health, wellbeing and developmental needs of vulnerable and unaccompanied children a priority for all government agencies; • Review and provision of advice to the Minister on the regulatory provisions that could assist in the development of a safe, effective, robust and flexible service system that is underpinned by appropriate service standards that can be delivered by an appropriately trained workforce; • Review and provision of advice to the Minister on how to monitor and report on the economic and social investments and value that are being generated by the service system through implementation of the Taskforce initiatives; • Review of service commissioning models to allow for a demand driven, flexible client centred and place-based approach with appropriate outcomes and impact measurement that will support ongoing and flexible investments; and • Provision of advice to the Minister on the legislative authority required to support decision making for children under the age of 16 where no effective guardian is available. 16. Strengthen provisions for authority and accountability achieved through the development of a clear policy position (overarching policy framework and possible legislative changes). 17. Offer national leadership by developing the first inclusive child and youth homelessness strategy in Australia to address child and youth homelessness (up to the age of 24). The strategy should include: • A vision to ensure that no Tasmanian child will be without care for their health, wellbeing and development irrespective of their circumstances. • A mission to ensure that every Tasmanian child who is homeless or at risk of homelessness has access to safe, caring and developmentally focussed services that ensure the health, wellbeing and development of that child by 2023.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 49 of 115
• A goal to codesign flexible, demand driven, client centred and regionally defined place- based service systems that meet the vision and mission by December 2023. 18. Improved understanding of the current system through the mapping the state and commonwealth direct investment into addressing the absence of care for children. 19. Develop agreed standards for organisations/individuals working with unaccompanied children under 16. 20. Consider new mechanisms to improve data sharing and collaboration across government and community sectors. 21. Incorporate outcome measurements into existing and new funding agreements. 22. Improve linkages with education and other data sets to raise flags earlier that a child may be at risk. 23. Strengthen provisions for data sharing achieved through technology, legislative and/or policy mechanisms. 24. Develop an integrated database and case management system that can access data and information from across all of the relevant service systems in order to ensure the best possible care and service co-ordination options are provided for children who are at risk. 25. Ongoing monitoring and reporting on Taskforce recommendations.
Service System Redesign 26. Establish a co-design and implementation group which will be comprised of relevant government agencies, key service stakeholders, young people and their families. This group would be co- chaired by the Department of Communities Tasmania and a community sector representative. This redesign process will consider existing Government reforms, including: • The Youth at Risk Strategy; • The Affordable Housing Strategy; • Strong Families, Safe Kids; • Out of Home Care Foundation Project; • The review of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services; • The reform Agenda for Alcohol and other Drugs; • Safe Homes, Safe Families; and • The Department of Education Student Engagement Action Plan 2018 – 2020. 27. The reshaping of existing services or commissioning of new services to address community need. This may include piloting of the following promising programs (dependent on community need): • Pilot the “Geelong Project” model with selected schools to create a focus within the service system on early identification of risk, intervention and prevention. • Pilot a “Lighthouse” like model which has a Housing First approach for children who are homeless and are able to live in a shared house with trained carers who live on site. • Pilot a “Safe House” response model to meet crisis and emergency accommodation needs in regional areas using existing available capacity in approved homes with trained and available carers. 28. Consideration by Housing Tasmania to reprioritise housing stock to support action 27. 29. Communication and education with relevant stakeholders to ensure a clear understanding of the revised service system and referral pathways.
PAGE 50 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Appendices
Appendix 1: Grouped recommendations from previous reviews Early identification and intervention National / State Report Recommendations
National Report Card on Youth Homelessness Prevent homelessness by supporting ‘at-risk’ families (Developing) (2018)
Resource early intervention for ‘at-risk’ young people (Little Progress)
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That the State Government provide new funding to the Gateway Integrated Family Support Services and Targeted Youth Support Services/Supported Youth Programs to enable earlier and more intensive support for whole families and for young people experiencing multiple difficulties. Support should be provided in the young person’s home, where appropriate.
That the State Government resource schools and training institutions to be key settings for the promotion of child and family wellbeing. This could be done by increasing the availability of psychologists and social workers to work with students and their families and providing extra training for teachers and welfare staff.
That the State Government adequately resource schools to better support students displaying truancy and difficult behaviours and their families, without resorting to suspension.
That the State Government continue to develop and resource a suite of flexible and participatory learning methods for students who need these approaches, both within schools and in alternative settings, in all three regions.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 51 of 115
Too Hard? Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania – In response to the gap in care existing between Child Safety Services and Specialist 2017 Homelessness Services: CREATE new care services targeted to highly vulnerable young people both with and without Care and Protection Orders, which include: — Intensive family reconnection work
Outreach National / State Report Recommendations
Youth at Risk Strategy (2017) Investigate opportunities to enhance outreach housing and support options for young people living in rural and remote areas
Short Term Accomodation Models National / State Report Recommendations
Youth at Risk Strategy (2017) Provide trauma informed, multi-disciplinary support services within the Youth at Risk Response Centre (Completed - Colville Place in Southern Tasmania now operating; similar service to be built in Launceston)
Tasmanian Affordable Housing Strategy (2015 – Working with Youth Family and Community Connections to replace their site for homeless 2025) – Action Plan 2 youth accommodation at Cooee to be co-located at the site of the new Burnie Youth Foyer.
Establishing a New Youth at Risk Centre in Launceston, similar to Colville Place in Moonah, to provide short-term homeless accommodation for vulnerable children and youth aged under 16 years olds.
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That the State Government establish bail hostels in the South and North of the state in a new partnership agreement between Youth Justice and Housing Tasmania, and that the hostels be provided with adequate staffing to ensure residents have the support they need to meet bail conditions.
PAGE 52 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Medium Term Accomodation Models National / State Report Recommendations
Youth at Risk Strategy (2017) Explore new models for medium term housing options for under 16s
Too Hard? Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania – In response to the gap in care existing between Child Safety Services and Specialist 2017 Homelessness Services:
CREATE new care services targeted to highly vulnerable young people both with and without Care and Protection Orders, which include: — Innovative medium-term and long-term accommodation options
Long Term Accomodation Models National / State Report Recommendations
National Report Card on Youth Homelessness A new form of youth housing which links housing to education, training and employment (2018) programs (Advancing)
Tasmanian Affordable Housing Strategy (2015 – Transitioning Tasmania’s three current youth supported accommodation facilities into 2025) – Action Plan 2 Education-First Youth Foyers.
Establishing new Youth Foyers for older youth aged 16-25 years old in Burnie and Hobart and expanding the Youth Foyer in Launceston (Thyne House).
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That the State Government establish a comprehensive suite of out-of-home care options for children and young people under Care and Protection Orders in Tasmania, including as a priority the establishment of suitable placements for young people aged 14-16 in each region.
That the State Government commit to providing all young people on Care and Protection Orders with stable and appropriate accommodation, and that parameters relating to Duty of Care are made clear for Specialist Homelessness System staff supporting young people on
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 53 of 115
Care and Protection Orders via a Memorandum of Understanding between Child Protection and Housing Tasmania.
That Housing Tasmania establish additional long-term facilities in each region with strong links between the housing provider and other service providers in areas of health, wellbeing, education, training and employment.
That Housing Tasmania ensure sufficient independent one- and two-bedroom units are available in each region for use by young people and small families.
Too Hard? Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania – In response to the gap in care existing between Child Safety Services and Specialist 2017 Homelessness Services: CREATE new care services targeted to highly vulnerable young people both with and without Care and Protection Orders, which include:
— Innovative medium-term and long-term accommodation options
Support Services National / State Report Recommendations
National Report Card on Youth Homelessness Post-vention support (Little Progress) (2018)
Redevelop employment (1), D&A (2) and mental health (3) programs for homeless young people (Little Progress 1 and 2) (Advancing 3)
Youth at Risk Strategy (2017) Provide ongoing support for young people on bail and youth transitioning out of juvenile detention (Completed - ongoing funding secured for Save the Children: Bail Support and Support for young people transitioning from AYDC
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That the State Government develop integrated preventative family support programs in all three Tasmanian regions based on known service gaps. That these family supports include universal education and training for parents as well as targeted support for families at risk of difficulties. Areas covered should include partner relationships, parenting skills, family
PAGE 54 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
and step family relationships, family transitions, parent-child relationships, parenting adolescents, managing a household, maintaining mental health and managing alcohol and drug use. Respite for parents should also be made available.
That the State Government provide new funding to Gateway Integrated Family Support Services and to Targeted Youth Support Services/Supported Youth Programs to ensure that family case-managed support is provided to families, and youth-specific support is provided to children/young people, for the duration of their involvement in the child protection system. This funding should include support for extended family members and foster and kinship carers.
That the State Government resource Child Protection’s After Care Support Programs to provide ‘parent-like’ support in areas of financial, vocational, practical and emotional need until the young person is ready for independence, up to age 25.
That the State Government increase funding to Child Protection Services to enable it to meet its statutory requirements and current demand for assessments and investigations, including assessing homeless young people residing in shelters. This would enable Child Protection Services to work closely with the proposed expanded family support programs to ensure that families and children receive adequate support for the duration of their involvement with Child Protection Services.
That the State Government ensure that Tasmania’s out-of-home care system includes the establishment of residential treatment facilities in each region with capacity to provide intensive clinical support for young people with mental health, behavioural and alcohol and other drug difficulties.
That Housing Tasmania resource Housing Connect with brokerage funds to provide, at the discretion of workers, transport, travel vouchers, food and blankets to young people who are not able to be accommodated in an emergency facility on a given night and are therefore expected to ‘sleep rough’.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 55 of 115
That the State Government establish more initiatives to support young people to meet bail conditions, including community-based order placements and support from Youth Justice workers in collaboration with the proposed family case-managers.
Too Hard? Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania – In response to the gap in care existing between Child Safety Services and Specialist 2017 Homelessness Services: CREATE new care services targeted to highly vulnerable young people both with and without Care and Protection Orders, which include:
— Long-term, therapeutic, mobile case coordination and case work
In addressing absences in the suite of specialist services available to teens in Tasmania:
EXPAND existing specialist adolescent services to include: — Trauma-specific mental health services with capacity for assertive outreach — Residential mental health recovery services
— Residential drug detoxification and rehabilitation services — Increased capacity and diversity of alternative education options
Who Cares – Supported Accommodation for SHS are historically aimed at transitioning clients to independent living and are not Unaccompanied Children (2017) adequately designed, staffed or resourced to provide intensive, therapeutic care for children who will often present with high and complex needs
Youth SHS accommodate a wide age range, are minimally staffed, most commonly offer a service to those aged 16 and above, and do not usually have capacity for family reunification or restoration work
Outside In – How the Youth Sector Supports the Develop Centralised School Engagement Coordination Services school re-engagement of vulnerable children in Learning Services should develop responsive, publicly visible engagement coordination Tasmania (2018) services to lead advocacy and action on schooling needs and, where needed, facilitate
PAGE 56 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
involvement in care planning with allied government and community sector family, child and youth services.
Embed Re-Engagement Programs in Schools Primary schools, high schools and secondary high schools/colleges must offer embedded, specialist re-engagement programs to support children’s re-entry to school following suspension, expulsion and prolonged absence, and offer temporary schooling for children experiencing geographic dislocation.
Respond to the Specific School Engagement and Learning Needs of Unaccompanied Homeless Children The Tasmanian Department of Education and Communities Tasmania must acknowledge and resource responses to the specific re-engagement and learning needs of unaccompanied homeless children. This should include a commitment by the Department of Education to prioritise engagement support and learning assessment for this cohort and a commitment by Communities Tasmania to address service gaps and design issues, including staffing ratios, within homelessness and outreach services accessed by children.
Strengthen the Presence of Social Workers in Schools This research recommends a significant increase in social work capacity in schools in order to provide continuous, relationship-based care for children; to liaise and collaborate with allied government and community sector supports; and to implement care and safety plans in the school environment.
Policy/Legislative and Authorising Environment National / State Report Recommendations
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 57 of 115
National Report Card on Youth Homelessness Develop and Implement a National Framework and National Homelessness Action Plan (2018) (Developing)
Affordable housing for young people (Little Progress)
Refocus service provision on building and resourcing ‘communities of services’ (Developing)
Ensure supported accommodation is accessible in all communities (Developing)
A new national approach for the care and protection of children in all states and territories (Developing)
Review and improve the quality of transition planning and case planning across the child safety and youth justice systems
Out of Home Care Strategy Proposed extension of support for young people in OOHC until 21 years of age
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That Housing Tasmania explicitly state within funding agreements that, where there is a need and at the discretion of workers, emergency Specialist Homelessness System placements may be extended to three months and transitional Specialist Homelessness System placements to two years.
That, until a suite of out-of-home care and longer-term accommodation options are in place, Housing Tasmania develop protocols with Housing Connect whereby young people aged 14 and 15 in receipt of independent government allowances and who have support may apply for direct tenancy in public or community housing.
That, until a suite of out-of-home care and longer-term accommodation options are in place to provide ‘exits’ from the Specialist Homelessness System for young people, the State Government fund additional emergency and transitional beds in each region, including remote areas.
That the State Government ensure that public housing stock transfers to community housing providers under Better Housing Futures reforms include an allocation for young people.
PAGE 58 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
That the Department of Health and Human Services require that Ashley Youth Detention Centre staff develop an ‘exit plan’, based on the young person’s needs and capacities, in partnership with every detainee prior to release. The exit plan to include suitable housing and support to the level required and support from Youth Justice workers both prior to and upon release.
That the Department of Health and Human Services require that Ashley Youth Detention Centre staff create and sustain links with community members and services to enable community-based vocational pathways and relationships with positive adult role models for young people detained at Ashley, and that these links be supported post-release.
Too Hard? Highly Vulnerable Teens in Tasmania – In the absence of program delivery focused on the needs of highly vulnerable teens: 2017 ESTABLISH a specific program area within Services to Youth (Children and Youth Services) for Youth at Risk Strategy implementation, ongoing service innovation and tendering
In ensuring obligations to provide statutory care and protection to highly vulnerable teens are met:
INCLUDE responses specifically targeted to the cumulative risk and needs of highly vulnerable teens in the current redesign and reform of child protection and out-of-home care services in Tasmania
Who Cares – Supported Accommodation for Those youth SHS accommodating unaccompanied children have few ways of exiting them Unaccompanied Children (2017) aside from family reunification. Children have neither the developmental nor financial capacity to transition to semi-independent youth housing, normally available for those aged
16 and above only. When they are unable to return home, this results in children cycling through available crisis or couch surfing options, potentially for years.
In a context in which significant numbers of older unaccompanied children present to SHS per year in Tasmania and an unknown number remain couch surfing, it is clear that public recognition of the care gap faced by this vulnerable cohort is needed. In particular, clear acknowledgement that this is a cohort that will not likely receive care through child protection services is also needed. Further, given older children remain distinctly unattractive clients to many SHS due to their complex needs and their young age and the
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 59 of 115
related ‘bed block’ their needed length of care may create, it certainly cannot be assumed that SHS are willing or have capacity to provide them with a care service either. Drawing across developments in other jurisdictions discussed in this review, recognition that unaccompanied older children require dedicated care should take place in Tasmania through: 1. Strong policy which addresses the unique ethical, legal and practical issues of providing care to unaccompanied children in SHS
2. Program innovation which directly articulates and addresses the specific care needs of older children, including family restoration, intensive therapeutic, trauma-informed care, and medium- and long-term care 3. Good practice guidelines for SHS accommodating under 16s developed through sector collaboration and consultation with unaccompanied older children which respond to and support the local area context 4. Service design or redesign with a focus on the special developmental needs of older children, positive and flexible engagement with risk, and capacity- and relationship-building amongst a full range of adolescent services, including Child Safety, Department of Education, primary health and mental health.
It is the alignment between policy, program and practice that will ultimately determine how effectively this hidden cohort can be responded to not just in Tasmania but nationally. Without strong policy which addresses the political stand-off but practical overlap between child protection and youth homelessness services, services that meet the needs of unaccompanied older children will not flourish and very serious duty of care issues will remain both for child protection and homelessness services. At minimum, renewed community discussion about how well the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1997 serves unaccompanied homeless children is required. There seem to be wide-ranging views on the extent to which the Child Safety Service has responsibility for the care and protection of unaccompanied children who experience risk independently outside the home or outside relationships with parents or carers.
PAGE 60 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
This review offers examples of current policy and program work and service provision aimed at strengthening and delivering care responses for unaccompanied children under 16. The Tasmanian Government has taken important steps in acknowledging the need to consider the care needs of this cohort, in particular the need for medium-term accommodation options. Further response should not, however, take the form of adopting a new model of service provision alone. A conceptual and cultural shift is required if the unique care needs of unaccompanied children are to be met. Children do not have accommodation needs, they have care needs. Where these needs are not met within child protection services, alternative care is required if we are to meet our obligations to Tasmanian children set out in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Such care requires a new policy and program environment which articulates who cares for whom and with what authority, responsibility and capacity. Significant change within the SHS sector in Tasmania is required if this is where the care needs of unaccompanied children will be met. Further, given it is also clear that elements of such care are already being provided to unaccompanied under 16s in SHS, immediate policy and a best practice guide are required to support the continuing efforts of existing services.
Outside In – How the Youth Sector Supports the Recognise the School Re-Engagement Rights and Needs of Tasmanian Children in Policy school re-engagement of vulnerable children in The Tasmanian Department of Education should implement a school re-engagement Tasmania (2018) strategy, including capacity to benchmark and monitor progress and outcomes through rigorous data collection from mainstream, alternative and home schooling provisions.
Resource the System Implementation of Trauma-Informed and Poverty-Informed Service Provision in Schools
The Tasmanian Department of Education should review how whole school environments can be systemically shaped as sites deeply sensitive to experiences of trauma and poverty. This should include professional development for all teaching and non-teaching school staff; teacher’s aide resourcing to support the implementation of responses to the specific learning needs of children impacted by trauma; and trauma-informed and poverty-informed revision of approaches to student behaviour and discipline, in particular suspensions.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 61 of 115
Information/Education/Awareness National / State Report Recommendations
Youth at Risk Strategy (2017) Educate and raise awareness of housing pathways for vulnerable young people
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That the State Government fund Housing Connect to provide information and resources to schools and family services in both urban and rural locations to ensure that teachers, school welfare staff, students and families know of the housing and support options available for young people who need to live away from the family home.
Other National / State Report Recommendations
Reducing Youth Homelessness - SARC (2014) That the State Government recruit more foster carers, in all regions and including remote areas, and provide them with specialised training to ensure they have the therapeutic skills to provide trauma-informed care for young people living with emotional, mental and behavioural difficulties. Further, that foster carers be recompensed according to their level of training and that they be supported by family case managers or another form of professional supervision.
That the State Government provide incentives (such as payment and reimbursements) to kinship carers to undertake training, that kinship carers be recompensed according to their level of training, and that training for kinship carers be followed up with support from family case managers.
That the State Government fund training in trauma-informed care for all Child Protection and out-of-home care staff.
PAGE 62 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
That the Department of Health and Human Services ensure that trauma-informed approaches be established in all youth justice services.
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 63 of 115
Appendix 2: Terms of Reference
Under 16 Youth Homelessness Taskforce
Background • The Youth at Risk Strategy was publicly released on 5 June 2017 to provide a long term, whole of government, strategic direction for responding to the safety and rehabilitative needs of young people (aged 10 to 17 years) who are at risk.
• Action #15 in the Youth at Risk Strategy commits to exploring new models for medium term accommodation options for under 16s. Youth homelessness for u16s has also been identified as one of the four priority action areas during a recent internal review of the Youth at Risk Strategy. • Tasmania’s Affordable Housing Strategy 2015–2025 was released in 2015 and is supported by two Action Plans. The Tasmanian Government recently released Action Plan 2 (2019-23), which contains initiatives that will improve youth homelessness in Tasmania. • One of these initiatives is the establishment of an Under 16 Homelessness Taskforce (the Taskforce), which will be coordinated by the Youth at Risk Project Team.
Purpose The purpose of the Taskforce is to: • Develop an understanding of the extent and nature of the issues associated with youth (under 16) homelessness, this will be achieved through analysis of: o Available data and research material which effectively defines the numbers of children at risks and their circumstances. o The current policy responses in place to address the needs of the children at risk of homelessness including: ▪ Youth at Risk Strategy ▪ Out of Home Care Strategy ▪ Affordable Housing Strategy ▪ Other Commonwealth and State Policies ▪ Responses in other jurisdictions o Initiatives or solutions that have been presented in the past through research or other community consultations o The key stakeholders who have an interest in addressing the needs of children at risk of homelessness. Provide advice to the Minister on the changes required to address these issues.
PAGE 64 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Role and Function The Taskforce is an advisory panel of experts that will develop advice to the Minister, which will consider:
• Current national and state data, and best practice in the prevention and provision of under 16 homelessness services. • The need for priority care of children who are under 16 and at risk of homelessness in Tasmania. • The relative merit of options that will provide support for children who are under 16 and at risk of homelessness, including (but not limited to): o the type of intensive coordination that is required to keep children housed with their families; o the level of assistance that young people require to find suitable and secure accommodation in a family environment with therapeutic support in place; and o ways to improve access to special care and stable accommodation. • The intersection between Child Safety/Youth Justice and Homelessness Services • The opportunities to develop partnerships across existing services to prioritise supports for under 16 homeless children and their families, including services that can address the broader wellbeing needs homeless children. • The legislative environment, including the age of consent, and how this may impact on decisions being made for children under 16 that are homeless.
Reporting The Taskforce will provide advice to the Minister by the end of August 2019 on the need for priority care of children who are under 16 and at risk of homelessness in Tasmania. This advice will also include guidance on the scope of work required to address the other Terms of Reference and the timeframes required to complete this work. The Taskforce will provide additional advice to the Minister by no later than November 2019. This report will provide the Minister with advice on: • Short-term initiatives that can be delivered within a 12-month period; and • Long-term initiatives that will require systemic changes.
Evaluation The evaluation process will be comprised of two components. The first component will measure whether advice to the Minister has been delivered on time and within the scope described in the project business plan. The second component of the evaluation will measure the outcomes that have resulted from the adoption of initiatives made by the Taskforce.
Membership Chair of Taskforce:
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 65 of 115
The taskforce will be led by an independent chair with a strong knowledge of the issues faced by homeless young people in Tasmania. The chair will have the skills to draw together the views of policy-makers, service providers and other experts in formulating advice on relevant issues. The Chair will report directly to the Minister for Human Services. The nominated chair of the Taskforce is: Chair: Mr Danny Sutton Chief Executive Officer, Colony 47
Where issues arise that would be deemed to be a conflict of interest for the Chair the role will be delegated to the Secretary, Communities Tasmania. Members of Taskforce: The membership of the Taskforce has been developed to provide a balanced view of youth homelessness, enable provision of advice around specific issues of youth homelessness and provide expert opinion on a potential strategy to address these issues.
The individuals have been identified as key members of the taskforce. Members may nominate additional expert delegates to attend and participate in Taskforce meetings, all additional delegates will be at the discretion of the Chair. Proxies from the same organisation may attend Taskforce meetings if the nominated member is unable to attend.
Membership: Ginna Webster – Secretary, Department of Communities Tasmania
Dr Catherine Robinson - Anglicare Tasmania – Social Action and Research Centre (SARC)
Professor Shelley Mallett – Director of Research and Policy Centre, Brotherhood of St Laurence
Marcus Turnbull – President, Family Law Practitioners Association of Tasmania
Mandy Reynolds-Smith – Department of Education Support for the Taskforce Resources from the Youth at Risk Project Team, Communities Tasmania will be made available to support the Taskforce. Support will include organising and developing materials for Taskforce meetings, coordinating consultation and delivering the outputs for consideration by the Taskforce.
Secretariat: Youth at Risk Project Team
Governance • The Taskforce will be a fixed term, non-political body. Briefings and correspondence from interested parties across parliament can be submitted to the Taskforce for their consideration. • The Taskforce may also provide briefings and seek feedback from members of parliament and other interested parties. • Prior to submitting advice to the Minister, the Taskforce must seek feedback from young people experiencing homelessness in relation to the short and long-term initiatives that have been identified. • The Taskforce will be independently chaired. The Chair of the Taskforce will report directly to the Minister for Human Services.
PAGE 66 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
• The Taskforce will work closely with relevant members of the Executive of the Department of Communities Tasmania, as well as key members of the Youth Homelessness Sector. • The Taskforce will provide regular updates to the Sector. • Communities Tasmania will fully fund the operations of the Taskforce, including any out of pocket expenses of members. • The Taskforce will conclude once advice is provided to the Minister on an appropriate strategy to address identified issues for young people who are u16 and homeless.
Member Roles Chair: The role of the Chair will be to draw together the views of policy-makers, service providers and other experts in formulating advice on relevant issues around youth homelessness. The Chair will guide the work of the project team and meet with Taskforce members as required. There will also be a requirement of the Chair to attend consultation sessions outside of Taskforce meetings and provide briefings on the progress of the Taskforce. The Chair will report directly to the Minister of Human Services.
Members: The role of the expert members of the Taskforce is to develop a shared understanding of the nature of the issues associated with homelessness of young people under the age of 16; and to use their individual expertise to provide advice on an appropriate approach to address these issues. Secretariat: The Youth at Risk Project Team will provide secretariat support to the Taskforce.
Meeting Times The Taskforce shall meet as described in the Meeting Schedule below:
Meeting Dates (Tentative) Purpose of Meeting
27 June 2019 Endorsement of Terms of Reference and initial discussions regarding the extent and nature of the issues associated with youth (under 16) homelessness.
1 August 2019 Consideration of information (including feedback from young people) that has been collated regarding the extent and nature of the issues associated with youth (under 16) homelessness.
29 August 2019 Discussion and endorsement of advice to the Minister on the extent and nature of the issues associated with youth (under 16) homelessness.
26 September 2019 A one-day workshop to consider advice to the Minister relating to: • Short-term initiatives that can be delivered within a 12-month period; and • Long-term initiatives that will require systemic changes62
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 67 of 115
21 November 2019 Discussion and endorsement of advice to the Minister.
Additional meetings may be convened as required. Videoconferencing facilities and teleconference facilities can be made available if required.
Meeting Protocols • The Secretariat will compile the upcoming agenda in consultation with the Chair. • Members of the Taskforce will be asked for agenda items up to 10 days prior to each meeting. • A final agenda will be distributed to members of the Taskforce at least 3 working days prior to each meeting. • Members may nominate through the Chair additional expert delegates to attend Taskforce meetings; these additional delegates will be asked to attend at the discretion of the Chair. • Members of the Taskforce will be able to delegate proxies from their organisations to attend meetings in their absence. • Meetings will be recorded by the Secretariat and full copies of the minutes, including attachments will be provided to all members of the Taskforce no later than seven working days following each meeting. • The Taskforce will provide advice to the Minister for Human Services at regular intervals and at the request of the Minister. • The Taskforce will not be required to make decisions.
Review of Terms of Reference The Terms of Reference may be amended by the Minister in consultation with the Chair.
PAGE 68 of 115 | UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE
Appendix 3: United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (simplified version)
• Article 1 states that “A child is a person under the age of 18.” • Article 3 states that “When adults make decisions, they should think about how their decisions will affect children. All adults should do what is best for children. Governments should make sure children are protected and looked after by their parents, or by other people when this is needed. Governments should make sure that people and places responsible for looking after children are doing a good job.” • Article 4 states that “Governments must do all they can to make sure that every child in their countries can enjoy all the rights in this Convention.” • Article 18 states that “Parents are the main people responsible for bringing up a child. When the child does not have any parents, another adult will have this responsibility and they are called a “guardian”. Parents and guardians should always consider what is best for that child. Governments should help them. Where a child has both parents, both of them should be responsible for bringing up the child.” • Article 19 states that “Governments must protect children from violence, abuse and being neglected by anyone who looks after them.” • Article 20 states that “Every child who cannot be looked after by their own family has the right to be looked after properly by people who respect the child’s religion, culture, language and other aspects of their life.” • Article 24 states that “Children have the right to the best health care possible clean water to drink healthy food and a clean and safe environment to live in. All adults and children should have information about how to stay safe and healthy.” • Article 26 states that “Governments should provide money or other support to help children from poor families.” • Article 27 states that “Children have the right to a standard of living that is good enough to meet their physical and mental needs. The government should help families who cannot afford to provide this.”63 • Article 28 states that “Every child has the right to an education. Primary education should be free. Secondary and higher education should be available to every child. Children should be encouraged to go to school to the highest level possible. Discipline in schools should respect children’s rights and never use violence.” • Article 34 states that “The government should protect children from sexual exploitation (being taken advantage of) and sexual abuse, including by people forcing children to have sex for money, or making sexual pictures or films of them.” • Article 36 states that “Children have the right to be protected from all other kinds of exploitation (being taken advantage of), even if these are not specifically mentioned in this Convention.”
63 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Simplified version); https://www.unicef.org.au/Upload/UNICEF/Media/Our%20work/childfriendlycrc.pdf (accessed 16/5/19)
UNDER 16 HOMELESSNESS TASKFORCE – MINISTERIAL ADVICE | PAGE 69 of 115
Appendix 4: UN Sustainable Development Goals
The UN Sustainable Development Goals • Goal 1 – No Poverty
o 1.4 states “Ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance.”
o 1.B states that “Create sound policy frameworks at the national, regional and international levels, based on pro-poor and gender-sensitive development strategies, to support accelerated investment in poverty eradication actions.”
• Goal 2 – Zero Hunger
o 2.1 states that “By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.”
• Goal 3 – Good Health and Well-being
o 3.5 states “Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol.”
• Goal 4 – Quality Education
o 4.1 states “By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and Goal-4 effective learning outcomes.”
o 4.6 states “By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults, both men and women, achieve literacy and numeracy.”
o 4.7 states “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.” • Goal 5 – Gender Equality
o 5.2 states “Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.”
• Goal 10 – Reduced Inequalities
o 10.3 states “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard.”
o 10.4 states “Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality.”
Appendix 5: De-identified Tasmanian Case Study
Sensitive case study information redacted ………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………..
Appendix 6: Consultation Case Studies
Sensitive case study information redacted …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
PAGE 74 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
PAGE 76 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
PAGE 78 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
PAGE 80 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Appendix 7: Jurisdictional Program Responses
Early Intervention and Prevention • Reconnect (All Australian jurisdictions) o A free service for 12-18 year old’s who are homeless/at risk of homelessness o Helps young people reconnect with their family, education, employment and in the community through mediation and counselling o Evaluation of Reconnect has found that young people in the program demonstrated positive outcomes in relation to control over their lives, housing permanency and improved relationships within their family and the community.64
• Community of Schools and Services Program (the “Geelong Project” or “COSS”)65 o Early identification and intervention for students at risk of homelessness using population screening, flexible practice framework and youth focused and family centred case management as well as a collective impact approach o Works with local schools and communities to find community driven solutions. o Uses a population screening tool developed by Swinburne University to identify students at risk of homelessness o Model includes longitudinal follow up and support to reduce homelessness, and achieve sustainable education and life outcomes o Program started in Geelong and has now expanded to communities in Vic, SA, NSW, WA and Qld o Evaluations have shown good short-term outcomes – 40% reduction in young students experiencing homelessness and a 20% reduction in the number of students dropping out of school o Being adopted for trial in Canada, USA (Seattle, San Francisco Bay, Minnesota) and Wales
• Family Reconciliation Initiative (Salvation Army VIC)66 o Assists 14-21 year olds to resolve and re-establish relationships with family o Includes mediation, counselling with the young person and their family with the aim of them returning home or relocating to extended or other family o Aims to prevent young people entering cycle of homelessness due to family breakdown
• Youth Hope67 (NSW: Wesley Mission; Uniting Burnside; Allambie) o Voluntary, early intervention program that works with young people and their families o Provides therapeutic wraparound support to complex families and young people at risk of significant harm. o Provides supports to families over a 12 month period to enable them to stay together and enable young people to stay safely at home.
64 Mission Australia, (2016) Reconnect Evaluation 2016, Accessible at: https://www.missionaustralia.com.au/documents/687-reconnect-evaluation- report/file 65Mackenzie, D., Thieking, M., (2013) The Geelong Project: A community of schools and youth services model for early intervention, Swinburne Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University, accessible at: http://www.thegeelongproject.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/The-Geelong-Project- FAHCSIA1.pdf 66 Salvation Army, Family Reconciliation Initiative; https://www.salvationarmy.org.au/locations/victoria/salvocare-eastern/youth-services/family- reconciliation-initiative/ 67 Wesley Mission, Youth Hope; https://www.wesleymission.org.au/about-us/what-we-do/helping-people-most-in-need/teenagers-and-young- adults/wesley-youth-hope/
• Detour (Melbourne City Mission)68 o Works with young people aged 12-24 years who are newly homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless. o Access to intensive support from a team of youth coaches, family mediation, links to counselling and community supports o Access to Kids Under Cover accommodation (backyard units) and short-term supported respite beds o Help with education, employment, health, family relationships o Youth Mobile Support Services (QLD, Melton (VIC)) o First response mobile outreach crisis response for young people o Find, identifies and engages with young people at risk or experiencing homelessness – meet young people where they are located or at a safe place o Young people assisted to navigate the Specialised Homelessness Services, support services and to address immediate needs (e.g. food, emergency shelter).
Short Term Accommodation Models / Respite / Crisis o Ruby’s Reunification Program 69(South Australia – 3 houses in Adelaide and 1 house in Mt Gambier) ▪ Similar to Reconnect – but with a part-time supported accommodation component allowing young person to have space and remove themselves from conflict (4-6 bed house staffed by youth workers, a coordinator and a counsellor) ▪ Provides diversion from youth crisis shelters through family reunification for 12-17 year olds ▪ Provides counselling and 24 hour support when the young person is at home ▪ If reunification is not possible assertive referrals are made to CPS for u15s and to shelters for over 15s. o Western Region Accommodation Program (WRAP) Enhanced Youth Refuge Response (Vic – City Mission)70 ▪ Crisis Refuge offering additional supports to young people aged 16-24 years ▪ Includes 24/7 staffing ▪ Up to 6 weeks accommodation ▪ Specialist Practitioner on-site to provide therapeutic interventions, counselling and advice for young people experiencing complex issues such as trauma, substance abuse and mental health issues. ▪ Outreach staff – able to provide post refuge support and family reconciliation support ▪ Short stay bed – flexible crisis response option to enable short stay respite while working with young person and their family
68 Melbourne City Mission, Detour Program; https://www.melbournecitymission.org.au/services/program-detail/detour 69Uniting Communities, Ruby’s Reunification Program; https://www.unitingcommunities.org/services/youth-services/support-young-people-homeless- risk/ 70 Melbourne City Mission, WRAP Enhanced Youth Refuge Response; https://www.melbournecitymission.org.au/services/program-detail/western- region-accommodation-program-(wrap-enhanced)
▪ Frontyard 24-Hour Crisis Accommodation Centre (Melbourne City Mission) o A trauma-informed response to youth homelessness (16-24 years). o Located in Melbourne’s CBD. o New crisis accommodation and connected services. o Provides information, short-term support and referrals for young people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. This support can be provided face to face at Frontyard and over the phone.
Medium Term Accommodation Models • Homeless Youth Assistance Program (HYAP – NSW) 71 o Funds NGOs to deliver support and accommodation models for unaccompanied children and young people aged 12 to 15 years who are homeless or at risk of homelessness (non-statutory response – flexible to meet needs of young person) o 19 service packages established across NSW o Aims to reconnect unaccompanied children and young people with their families or wider support networks or facilitate transitions to more appropriate long-term supported accommodation o Consistency and constancy of care crucial to address the complex needs of this cohort o Service principles – evidence based; client centred; trauma informed; collaborative; capacity building; accessible; culturally appropriate; continuity of care ▪ Service approach – supported accommodation, strengths based case management, prevention and early intervention, wrap around services, brokerage fundingLillians – staffed 24/7 and provides intensive trauma and attachment focussed case management to 7 girls aged 12-15 years. Also have 2 transitional properties for girls moving towards independence. Most of the girls are unable to return home and need long-term care and help to transition eventually to independence. ▪ Taldumande – links family preservation work with supported HYAP accommodation. Work with family and young person using a seven stage crisis intervention model. Provides time out for young person to give space for them to work out issues and family conflict. Provides long term accommodation, with one bed specifically allocated to YJ clients on bail. Young person is able to transition to more independent living houses as they become ready.
▪ St Laurence House – provides medium to long term accommodation for 13-17 year olds. Home like environment for up to 4 clients and staffed 24/7. Model of trauma informed care; promotes living skills. Links to other support services, education and other crisis and accommodation services.
• My Foundations Youth Housing (NSW)72 o Development of cross sector partnerships to deliver youth specific and appropriate social housing for vulnerable youth (for those aged >16 years) ▪ Addison Project - Use of vacant hotel to provide emergency accommodation for at risk youth; links with OzHarvest “rescued food” ▪ Transitional Housing Plus (5 years secure tenure – rent scaling over time) ▪ Provides support co-ordinators, case managers, referrals and support to access other services, education and training.
71 NSW Government, Homeless Youth Assistance Program (HYAP), Service Delivery Framework, 2016 [online] Available at: https://www.housing.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/325188/HYAP-Service-Delivery-Framework.pdf 72 My Foundations Youth Housing; http://www.mfyh.org.au/
• Host Homes (Canada)73 o Community Volunteers open up their homes for up to 6 months for young people experiencing homelessness (may be paid a stipend for food/costs etc) o Available for young people aged 14 – 26 years who are at risk of or experiencing homelessness and where a shelter is not the best option o Youth are matched to an appropriate host who offer a private room, food as well as support from the host family
Long-Term Accommodation Models • Youth Foyers74 (Education First Accredited Foyers in NSW, VIC, WA, SA, Qld, ACT, (Tasmania moving towards accreditation – Thyne House (Nth), Trinity Hill (Sth), Eveline House (Devonport)) o Integrated learning and supported long-term accommodation model for 16-24 year olds o Requirement that the young person engages with education, training or employment o Support provided by trained staff 24/7 onsite, individual case management with access to other supports as required o Skill development and transition to independent living after 2-3 years. o Use “advantage-thinking” as their model of practice – building on a positive view and strengths based approach for young people (Tasmania working towards this) o New Youth Foyer to be built in Burnie under the Affordable Housing Strategy Action Plan
• Lighthouse Model (Vic – focus ages 15-22 years)75 o Lighthouse homes provide children and young people with an experience of a family-style environment and stable housing. o House up to 4 young people with two therapeutically trained carers who share the home with them. o Young people and carers are supported by a team of clinicians who assess the needs of the young person, facilitate therapy sessions, supervise carers, and form care teams. o No time limits on housing – and young person can leave house for a period of time (e.g. trial of independent living) and return as many times as needed. Provides after care and outreach programs once a young person has moved out of the program.
• Premier’s Youth Initiative (NSW)76 o Piloting a new approach to support those leaving OOHC o Provision of 130 new homes for young people leaving OOHC o Includes transitional accommodation support and long-term accommodation o Young people provided with advice, education, mentoring
73 Host Homes Canada; https://www.hosthomes.org/ 74 Foyer Foundation Australia; http://foyer.org.au/ 75 Lighthouse Foundation; http://lighthousefoundation.org.au/ 76NSW Government, Premier’s Youth Initiative; https://www.nsw.gov.au/improving-nsw/premiers-priorities/reducing-youth-homelessness/
• Housing First for Youth77 (Canada - adapted for young people aged 13-25yrs; similar models in UK, Ireland; USA Rapid Rehousing for Youth78 – Supported flexible models based on Housing first principles) o Key Points: ▪ Immediate access to housing with no barriers or preconditions ▪ Based on positive youth development ▪ Youth choice and self-determination ▪ Consistent primary worker / case co-ordinator ▪ Individualised and client driven supports within an integrated system of care which includes partnerships across agencies/services ▪ Social and Community integration of young person o Includes supports for health and well being, supports for accessing income and education, participation/engagement; complementary supports. Supports are driven by the client not the program; strengths based positive youth development approach. o Includes different models of accommodation and transition pathways ▪ Return Home to parents or another significant adult or family friends (Family Reconnect) ▪ Transitional Housing (appropriate for young people who are developmentally not ready or have not obtained skills required to live independently – also reduces loneliness) ▪ Independent Living (own or shared permanent house in either private or public housing sector (e.g. Infinity Project in Calgary) ▪ Permanent Supportive Housing (may be required by youth with chronic mental health or other long term support needs)
77 Gaetz, Stephen. (2017). THIS is Housing First for Youth: A Program Model Guide. Toronto: Canadian Observatory on Homelessness Press; https://www.homelesshub.ca/sites/default/files/COH-AWH-HF4Y.pdf (accessed 21/05/19) 78 USA Rapid Re-housing for youth; https://endhomelessness.org/resource/rapid-re-housing-for-youth-toolkit/
Appendix 8: Draft Guiding Principles
The Taskforce has developed five guiding principles that have helped to shape the options, these include: 1. All children and families should be respected, their capabilities and talents promoted and enhanced to increase their agency and capacity to live a life that they value. 2. Every child has a right to be cared for by an individual/authority who is responsible for promoting and safeguarding their wellbeing. 3. Every child has a right to access material basics, including as a minimum food, warmth and safety. 4. Every child has a right to access meaningful universal services including health, mental health and education. 5. All children and families should be able to access services (including education and training) that can be tailored to their needs and are reflective of their individual circumstances.
In pursuing these principles, the State Government should accurately and transparently report on the number and wellbeing of unaccompanied children in Tasmania.
Appendix 9: Consultation Questions
PAGE 88 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
Appendix 10: Summary of Consultation Feedback The Taskforce Secretariat consulted with 320 people from July to September 2019. This included children and young people (aged between 11 and 18 years) who had experienced homelessness, parents or carers of young people who had experienced homelessness, service providers that work with homeless children and young people, peak organisations and members of the general public. These consultations were conducted through face to face discussions or confidential online surveys. Face to face consultations were held throughout Tasmania, including remote and regional areas on the West and East Coasts.
Online Survey Responses As of the 20 September 2019 there were 206 people who had completed the online survey.
The largest number of responses to the online survey were received from general public (55%). This group was made up of two cohorts: young people aged under 16 years who did not identify themselves as homeless or at risk but had ‘an interest in the homelessness issue’ (32%); and responses received from members of the general public who were aged over 16 years (23%). A total of 59 workers, from services who work with children and young people at risk, responded to the online survey. Responses were received from a wide range of government and non government youth service providers such as Child Safety Service, Youth Justice, Police, Social Workers (Hospitals and Schools), Anglicare, Baptcare, Mission, Colony 47, Housing Connect Providers, PCYCs, Out of Home Care Providers, Neighbourhood Houses and Local Councils. Only a small number of parents (11) responded to the online survey. This group proved difficult to target within our consultations due to the lack of services who work with parents of at risk young people, the ongoing conflict between the parents and the young person, and the unwillingness of the parents to engage with services.
There were 23 (11%) young people who responded to the survey who identified themselves as homeless or at risk of homelessness. A breakdown of survey respondents is shown in Figure 1 below:
Figure 1: Online Survey Respondents
General Public (>16yrs) 22.82%
General Public (Young People <16yrs) 32.04%
Service Provider 28.64%
Parent of child at risk 5.34%
Child at risk 11.17%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Survey responses from children/young people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness Of the survey respondents, 23 were from children and young people who identified as being homeless or at risk of homelessness. The age range of these respondents was between 9 -16 years of age. As shown in Figure 2 below, the majority of these children and young people (61%) were living at home with their family, but considered themselves to be at risk of homelessness or had previously experienced periods of homelessness. Responses under the “Other” category included living with partner and baby and living across a range of options.
Figure 2: Where is the young person currently living? 70% 60.87% 60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 8.70% 8.70% 8.70% 10% 4.35% 4.35% 4.35% 0.00% 0% Home with Relative's Foster Friend's Shelter Sleeping Couch Other family House Carer House Rough Surfing
Face to face consultations The Youth at Risk project team undertook targeted consultations with 64 young people at risk and 50 workers from services that work with these young people. Peak bodies, the Children’s Commissioner, the Children and Young Person’s Advocate and members of the Legislative Council were also briefed on the taskforce process. Face to face consultations focused on similar questions to the survey and enabled the project team to elicit more detailed responses as well as document a number of case studies which highlighted the complex issues and barriers these children and young people face. Table 1 outlines the face to face consultations and briefings that were undertaken.
Table 1: Face to Face Stakeholder Consultations
Stakeholder Service Type Region Participants
Shelter Tasmania Peak Body Statewide 2 members
YNOT Youth Peak Body Statewide 1 member
Youth Futures Crisis Shelter – Male North 3 young people 1 worker
Thyne House Transitional Housing North 4 young people
RADAR Tier 4 Flexible Learning North 6 young people 5 workers
Anglicare Supported Youth Program North 2 young people 5 workers
Colville Place Crisis Shelter for under 16s South 4 young people 1 worker
Youth Justice Team Youth Justice South 7 workers
Mara House Crisis /Transitional Young Women’s Shelter South 3 young people
Karinya Crisis Shelter – Young Women North 1 young person 2 workers
Cornerstone Headspace, Mental Health Programs, North / North 4 workers Outreach, support, early intervention, West Aboriginal program
Legal Aid Legal Assistance, Youth Justice South 1 worker
Reconnect Early Intervention / Reunification South 1 young person 1 worker
PAGE 102 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
Stakeholder Service Type Region Participants
Rural Alive and Well Mental Health and Suicide Prevention in West Coast 1 worker (RAW) rural communities
Queenstown CFC Family Support for parents and children Queenstown 2 workers aged 0-5 years
Rosebery District High District High School Rosebery 9 young people School 2 workers
Rosebery Community Neighbourhood House – Family, Community Rosebery 1 worker House Support and programs
SPACE Tier 4 Flexible Learning Program Devonport 3 young people 5 workers
Eveline House Transitional Housing Devonport 2 young people 1 worker
Ashley Youth Detention Custodial Youth Justice Facility Deloraine 11 young people Centre
St Helens Neighbourhood Community Programs St Helens 2 volunteers House
St Helens District High District High School St Helens 3 young people 1 worker
St Francis Flexible Learning School Chigwell 1 worker
Small Steps Supported live-in parenting program Newtown 5 young mums 2 workers
The Link Health and Wellbeing Services for young Hobart 7 young people people
Children’s Commissioner Consultation planned Hobart Children’s Commissioner
2 workers
Children and Young Advocate for children and young people in Hobart Child Advocate Person Advocate OOHC
TYHHG Meeting Consultation planned 16/09/19 Launceston 9 members
TASCOSS Peak Body Hobart CEO
Legislative Council Legislative Council Hobart 10 members
Speaker of the House of Speaker Hobart Speaker Assembly
PAGE 103 of 115 | Summary of Consultation Feedback
Summary of Feedback Below is a summary of feedback that has been received for the survey questions through the online survey and through face to face consultations. Where appropriate, feedback from the online survey responses and feedback received during the face to face consultations have been combined to give a more complete picture.
It should be noted that some respondents gave multiple answers to each question. As a result, within the tables answers are shown as the number of responses received rather than a percentage of the number of people who responded to that question. The question asking stakeholders to provide solutions to u16 homelessness have been collated and analysed separately. These solutions will be attached to this document once finalised.
PAGE 104 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
Causes of Homelessness for children/young people under 16 Table 2 shows the most frequently identified causes of homelessness that were identified by children/young people, parents/carers, service providers and the general public. Overall the most frequently identified causes of homelessness were Family Relationship Breakdown (73), Trauma, Abuse and Neglect (65), Family Violence (55) and Drug and Alcohol issues (54). Interestingly Family Relationship Breakdown was identified more often by children and young people and the general public (which was predominantly comprised of young people) whereas Family Violence was identified more frequently by service providers (and the small number of parents surveyed).
Table 2: What do you think causes children/young people under 16 to be homeless? Children/Young People Parents/Family/Carer Service Provider General Public 1. Family Relationship Breakdown 1. Family Violence (5) 1. Family Violence (30) 1. Family Relationship Breakdown (31) (16)
2. Abuse and Neglect (12) 2. Drugs and Alcohol (4) 2. Trauma, Abuse and Neglect (27) 2. Abuse and Neglect (25)
3. Drugs and Alcohol (9) 3. Poverty (3) Drugs and Alcohol (27) 3. Poverty (23) 4. Poverty (8) – Peer Pressures 3. Family Relationship Breakdown (26) 4. Drugs and Alcohol (14)
Kicked out of home (8) – Non-conformity 4. Parental separation/Blended families – 5. Family Violence (12) financial strain/no space/added tensions (16) Family violence (8) – Affordable housing 5. Mental Health (14) 6. Unable to afford housing/housing crisis (6) 5. Don’t like home life (5) – Knowledge of budgeting & 6. Lack of parental support and supervision 7. Influence of peers (3) maintaining a home (12) 6. Lack of Family Support/Parents – Overcrowding 7. Poverty (10) Blended families/ unable to cope (4) Divorce/Separation (3) Blended families, – Family has unstable housing 8. Lack of specialist and universal support Run Away (3) Divorce/Overcrowding(4) services (6) 6c. Arguments (4) – Child Abuse 9. Parents unable to manage behaviours (4) 8. Don’t like parent’s rules (2)
PAGE 105 of 115 | Summary of Consultation Feedback
Prevention of homelessness Table 3 shows the most frequent responses to the question “How can we prevent children/young people under 16 from experiencing homelessness?” The highest number of responses identified family support, including intensive and in-home targeted support for families of teenagers (28) as a preventative measure. This was followed by increasing the number of current crisis shelters or shelter beds (32), provision of a range of flexible housing options for young people (23) and better identification and early intervention for at-risk children (20). Children/Young People at risk identified a range of options with the most frequent being counselling for the child, parent and family (5).
Table 3: How can we prevent children/young people under 16 from experiencing homelessness? Children/Young People Parents/Family/Carers Service Providers General Public 1. Counselling for Child, Parent, 1. Viable long term housing 1. Range of flexible housing options for 1. More shelters/shelter beds (15) Family (5) options for families and young young people: to meet differing people (4) complexities/needs (19) 2. More shelters/shelter beds (4) 2. Intense family support (2) 2a. In home, targeted family support for 2. Family support (9) families with teenagers (14) 3a. Access to food, clothes and - Support at school (2) 2b. Better identification and early 3. Increase parenting skills and shelter (3) intervention for at-risk children (14) parental awareness of needs/behaviours of young people (8) 3b. Increase awareness of services - Educate in schools about 3. Increased support services for parents 4a. Somewhere to go that is safe and through schools (3) healthy relationships (2) and young people (13) warm and has activities (6) 3c. Provide somewhere safe for - Parenting Programs (2) 4. Increased response and accountability 4b. Better identification and early them to go (3) from CSS (11) intervention for at-risk children (6) 3d. Family support (3) - Linkage of services 5. Increased number of shelters and shelter 5. Someone to talk to (6) beds (8) 4a. Someone to talk to (2) - Counselling 6a. Increase benefits/improve access to 6. Increase employment/jobs (4) money for parents and child (5) 4b. Space/time apart from parents - - Teach young people life skills 6b. Increase access to services (5) 7a. Educate staff on how to identify respite (2) children who have experienced trauma, abuse or neglect (3) 4c. Mentoring for parents and young - Drop in centres 7. Increased mental health services and 7b. Increase benefits/improve access to person (2) supports (4) money for parents and child (3)
PAGE 106 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
Rating of the current homelessness service system Stakeholders were asked to rate the current homelessness service system for children/young people under 16. The homelessness service system was defined as including shelters, housing and other supports like mental health services, alcohol and drug services and family counselling. As shown in Figure 3 the majority of stakeholders rated the current homelessness service system across the range of OK to Very Poor. Parents of young people at risk were the most critical of the service system with 90% rating the system as Poor to Very Poor (note that the number of parents who responded was very low). Service providers were also quite critical of the current system with the majority (98%) rating the system between Very Poor to OK. Interestingly young people at risk were the least critical of the current system with the majority rating the system as OK (49%) and 22% rating it as Good. Responses from the general public were the most dispersed across all categories, the majority rating the system as OK (43%).
Figure 3: Rating of the current homelessness service system for u16s 70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Very Poor Poor OK Good Very Good
Young Person Parents Service Providers General Public
PAGE 107 of 115 | Summary of Consultation Feedback
Figure 4 shows the rating of the current homelessness service system for u16s broken down by regional area. The graph highlights the differences across regions showing that the North had more responses in the very poor category than any other region and the North West had the most positive responses with a higher percentage of responses seen in the OK, good and very good categories compared to other regions.
Figure 4: Rating of Current Homeless Service System for u16s by Region 50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0% Very Poor Poor OK Good Very Good
North North West South
PAGE 108 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
Barriers to accessing homelessness services As shown in Table 4 the most frequently identified barrier to accessing homelessness services and support was the inability to access services because they were full, not in local area, had waiting lists, their hours of operation and the eligibility requirements (55). This was closely followed by lack of information and knowledge about services (43). Young people however, identified being scared as the main barrier (15), this was followed by a lack of safety within services (both real and perceived) due to crime, threats, rumours and older residents (14). Table 4: What prevents children/young people under 16 accessing homelessness services & supports?
Children/Young People Parents/Family/Carers Service Providers 1. Scared (15) 1. Unable to access services (Full, 1. Unable to access services (Full, Waiting list, Eligibility, Eligibility, Age, Hours of Service, Drug Issues, Behaviour) (37) Location) (8) 2. Safety at services (Crime, unsafe, hear bad 2. Lack of information or knowledge about 2. Lack of information or knowledge about services (23) stories/rumours, threats, older kids) (14) services (7) 3. Lack of information/knowledge about services (13) - Fear of rejection 3. Lack of services in regional areas (21) 4a. Unable to access services (Eligibility, Age, Full, Hours - Shame 4a. Don’t know how/lack support to access services (6) of Service, Waiting List) (10) 4b. Don’t know how/lack support to access services (10) - Judgement 4b. Not wanting to abide by rules (6)
5a. Lack of Money (6) – Unable to access Centrelink 4c. Inappropriate mix of people in shelters (6)
5b. Stigma (6) – Lack of safe accommodation 4d. Stigma (6)
6a. Distance to services (Lack of Transport) (3) – Service gaps 4e. Safety at services (Crime, unsafe, hear bad stories/rumours, threats, older kids) (6) 6b. Embarrassed (3) – Services not open after hours 5. Transport (4) 6c. Don’t want to ask for help (3) - Anxiety 6. Disengaged from education (3)
6d. Lack of Services (3) - Stigma 7a. Judgement from services (2)
PAGE 109 of 115 | Summary of Consultation Feedback
Services considered important to support u16s who are homeless Stakeholders were asked what they thought were the three most important services needed to support children/young people under 16 who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. Answers were weighted according to the importance placed on them by the respondent. The service listed as the most important was given 3 points, 2nd most important 2 points and the third most important 1 point. As shown in Table 5, the most important service identified by all stakeholders was the provision of safe shelter/accommodation (129). Service providers identified Family Support and Reunification (28) and Mental Health support and services (28) as the next most important services, whilst young people identified access to food and necessary supplies (31) and Parents/Carers identified Counselling (8) as the next most important. Table 5: What are the most important services needed to support under16s who are homeless?
Children/Young People Parents/Family/Carers Service Providers 1. Safe shelter/accommodation (49) 1. Safe Shelter/accommodation options (17) 1. Safe, appropriately resourced and staffed supported crisis accommodation (63) 2. Food (25) 2. Counselling (8) 2. Family Support and Reunification Services (28) 3. Money/Access to Centrelink (14) 3. Access to necessities (food/supplies) (6) Mental Health Support and Services (28) Somewhere safe to go (14) Education (6) 3. Youth Support Services/Case Management (26)
4. Counselling (11) 4. Support to find a home (5) 4. Medium-Long term accommodation (20)
5. Someone to talk to who will understand and help Mental health services and support (5) 4. Child Safety intervention (17) them move forward (8)
6. Accommodation specific to under 16s (6) 5. Youth Hostels (3) 6. Counselling (14)
Medium-Long term accommodation (6) School Programs (Education/Awareness) 7. Alcohol and Drug Services (13) (3) 7. Doctor/Health Services (5) Parenting Support (3) 8. Food and basic supplies (11)
8. Support by family members (3) School Support (3) 9. Youth Outreach Workers (6)
Family Violence support (3) Support Groups (2) Family Based Respite Services (6)
PAGE 110 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
What is needed for a child/young person to return home? The response from stakeholders to this question was often qualified with “it depends on the situation” and “a child/young person should only be supported to move back home if it safe to do so”. As shown in Table 6 the most frequent responses identified Long Term Family Support (intensive when needed) (31) and Family Mediation and Counselling (31) as being needed for children/young people who are under 16 and homeless to return home.
It should be noted that the majority of children/young people that we spoke to who were currently residing in shelters, or otherwise homeless, did not believe there was anything that could be done that would assist them in returning home.
Table 6: What would children/young people who are under 16 homeless need to return home?
Children/Young People Parents/Family/Carers Service Providers 1. Family Mediation/Counselling (11) 1. Family Mediation/Counselling (3) 1. Long term family support (intensive when needed) (23) 2. Long term Family Support (intensive when 2. Safe home environment (2) 2. Family Mediation/Counselling (17) needed) (8) 3. Regular checking up on the family (5) - Behaviour and anger management 3. Safe Home (11) 4. Support for parents to address their issues - Structure, routine and discipline 4. Mental Health Services and Supports (5) (Alcohol and Drug, Mental Health) (4) - Parenting classes 5. Respite programs for families (3)
PAGE 111 of 115 | Summary of Consultation Feedback
Services considered important to support families Stakeholders were asked what they thought were the three most important services that were needed to support families of children/young people under 16 who were homeless or at risk of homelessness. Answers were weighted according to the importance placed on them by the respondent. The service listed as the most important was given 3 points, 2nd most important 2 points and the third most important 1 point. As shown in Table 7, the most important service identified was Family Supports (80), followed by Family Mediation and Counselling (73). During consultations it was noted that this question was often confused with the preceding question about services to support u16s that are homeless.
Table 7: What are the most important services to support families of children/young people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness?
Children/Young People Parents/Family/Carers Service Providers 1. Family Supports (intense when needed) (16) 1. Family Mediation/Counselling (11) 1. Family Mediation/Counselling (55) 2. Family Mediation/Counselling (7) 2. Family Support (10) 2. Family Support/Case Management (intense when needed) (54) 3. Secure accommodation (6) 3. Affordable, safe accommodation (5) 3. Parenting Support/Skills (21) 4. Respite for families / young person (3) 4. Increase in welfare benefits (3) 4. Child Safety Services (19) Respite for families / young person (3) 5. Access to Housing (18) More Government Funding for Youth 6. Mental Health Services and Supports (15) Services (3) - Drop in zones to talk to counsellors 7. Financial Support (11) - Let the child/youth have a say 8. Alcohol and Drug Services/Rehab (9)
PAGE 112 of 115 | REPORT TITLE
Appendix 11: Taskforce Process
In order to ensure the Taskforce was well informed and decision making was based on the most recent evidence available, a detailed and structured program of work was developed. This included: May-June 2019: Development of a Desktop Review outlining recent data, the current service system and initiatives occurring nationally and internationally.
June 2019: Establishment of Taskforce and announcement of Taskforce members Terms of Reference for the Taskforce Developed 27 June 2019: First Taskforce Meeting
July 2019: Development of an online survey July 2019: Development of posters promoting face to face consultations at relevant organisations as well as links to the online survey (Refer to Appendix 12) 22 July – 20 Sep 2019: Online survey opened and distributed to relevant stakeholders, including all public and private high schools
July – Sep 2019: Targeted Face to Face consultations with young people and the youth sector 1 Aug 2019: Second Taskforce Meeting Subgroups established with Taskforce members to explore specific areas of work
13 Sep 2019: Interim Advice provided to the Minister on the progress of the Taskforce 22 Oct 2019: Third Taskforce Meeting Oct-Dec 2019: Development of Final Advice and Recommendations to the Minister
11 Nov 2019: Briefing with Children and Youth Services and Housing, Disability and Community Services 25-28 Nov 2019: Regional Forums with the sector to update them on the findings of the Taskforce and provide an opportunity for final input into regional short term initiatives 6 Dec 2019: Final Taskforce Meeting
20 Dec 2019: Final Advice provided to the Minister
Appendix 12: Consultation Poster