Accommodation services
|
|  Yüklə 226.5 Kb.
|
217 community.' Funding for the BABI program includes a small grant from YSAP. In April 1985, the YSAP grant, together with donations from the community, enabled the program to open an office and employ two part-time workers for a total of 40 hours per week. In November 1986, BABI received funding for an extra half a position. This funding barely covers the cost of the boarding program. 18.28 No funding is received for the medium to long-term accommodation program. This means that, during 1986-87, the Commonwealth Government provided 2.8% of the operating cost of the BABI project. In BABI's submission to the Inquiry, it was stated that they considered a 10% contribution from the Commonwealth Government would be realistic, given that the local community is prepared to carry 90% of the cost of their programs for addressing the needs of homeless youth.22 18.29 During the 12 month period November 1986 to October 1987, BABI placed 74 homeless young people. All of these young people were at risk of being brought to the attention of the welfare system (the majority being considered uncontrollable and potential 'care and control' cases) or of the criminal justice system." In the same period a large number of young people who contacted BABI were maintained in their families with BABI's help.24 (Counselling contact was made with over 220 young people and/or families during this period.) BABI recognises that many of the young people who form its client group would otherwise be involved in the welfare and/or juvenile justice systems and demonstrates the success of its programs in this context: ...not one of the young people that we have worked with have needed to be.. .taken into secure detention.. .and also, not one of these young people has been admitted to care and control by the Department of Youth and Family Services." In support of BABI, the supervisor of the local office of the Queensland Department of Family Services estimated in 1987 that: ...our workload with adolescents has been lessened by between one-third and one-half over the last three years due to the work being done by BABI." Given these results, BABI's request for funding seems extremely reasonable to the Inquiry — and the refusal to grant it, extremely short-sighted on the part of government. The enormous efforts made by this community cannot be sustained indefinitely without some additional resources from government. 18.30 In summary, BABI incorporates the following important features:
1831 The Community Placement Scheme (CPS) has been operating in country and metropolitan Victoria for the past seven years and is relevant for particular groups of homeless young people. For the purposes of the CPS, a 'household' is a group of one or more people, including an adult, who are living together in a long-term and co-operative situation. Most of the CPS projects are community-managed." 18.32 The CPS aims to provide secure accommodation where household or family accommodation is appropriate to the young homeless person's requirements and wishes. The Schemes operating in Victoria are not intended to target young people who need 'specialised' support and would therefore require host families to undertake significant training and be paid a salary for their intensive support. Instead, the CPS program provides a negotiated level of assistance as determined between the young person, the household 218 and the youth workers employed by the community agency, with the intention of assisting the young person towards independence." The principles of operation of the Victorian CPS's are:
CPS programs currently operating provide accommodation for a broad range of young people, although most are younger homeless children. 18.33 As there are no fully funded CPS programs operating in Victoria," staffing levels vary greatly among existing schemes. Most schemes require a 'worker' (who is a general youth housing worker) and a detached counsellor, or refuge worker. The Victorian Youth Accommodation Coalition stressed, in its submission to the Inquiry, that the CPS model calls for at least one worker and separate administrative support for the successful operation of a program.3' The responsibilities of workers in a CPS program include:
The selection and matching of households to homeless young people is critical for the success of the program and particular care is required in the interests of the safety of the young person to be accommodated. 18.34 Since the establishment of YSAP, the eligibility of CPS programs for funding has been in doubt. The CPS model is generally not eligible for YSAP funds because the Commonwealth views community placement as akin to fostering programs — traditionally an area of State 'welfare' responsibility. Programs which had received funding for the 'Reserve Bed Scheme' under YSAP's precursor program (the Youth Services Scheme) fought for, and won, continuation of minimal funding provided through YSAP for payment to accommodation providers (approximately $25.00 per week per household). However, this funding is quite inadequate. It does not cover the costs incurred by the family, nor pay for the administration and development of the scheme, much less for service expansion." The youth accommodation sector has long argued that, due to the success of the CPS and the demonstrable need for this accommodation option, CPS programs should be part of a properly funded network of housing services. 34 Despite this, funding has never been secure and has often been provided by philanthropic trusts for short periods only. This lack of security and the related poor levels of resourcing have led to the loss of many experienced workers, the premature demise of many valuable schemes and consequent loss of a viable accommodation option. DETACHED HOUSING SUPPORT 18.35 Evidence to the Inquiry stressed the importance, for many young people, of continuing support in their transition to fully independent living. Supported accommodation is often the logical next step for young people in refuges seeking independence." The Inquiry believes that supported accommodation for young people is best provided by projects which offer intensive support, counselling and training in the early stages — with these being gradually withdrawn as the young person matures, develops supportive networks and becomes financially self-sufficient. We were impressed by programs which enable the young person to remain in the same accommodation while this process of staged withdrawal of intensive support takes place. One witness to the Inquiry recommended the expansion of such schemes: ...the current State and Federal Ministers for Housing [should] look into the possibility of funding self-contained units with worker support for long-term accommodation for young homeless people." 18.36 Detached housing support programs take a variety of forms. In some, a community organisation has established a household of young people with a live-in worker. Other households are supported by a worker who lives elsewhere. In other programs, young people live singly or in couples supported by outreach workers. The projects share the following objectives:
Many support workers have reported that one major difficulty with their task is that they act as both landlord and supporter — roles which are often incompatible." 18.37 Most programs operate houses leased from State housing Authorities, as in the Community Tenancy Scheme and the Head Leasing Transfer Scheme discussed below. Others utilise houses built under the Crisis Accommodation Program. A few offer support to young people in privately rented accommodation. The Youth Tenancy Officers of the South Australian Housing Trust extend support to tenants in public sector accommodation (see Chapter 16, Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement). Head Leasing Transfer Scheme (New South Wales) 18.38 An approach strongly supported by a number witnesses to the Inquiry was the leasing of public housing stock to community organisations to provide supported accommodation for young people. The Head Leasing Transfer Scheme is a program piloted in 1977 by the New South Wales Housing Department, combining its resources and those of community-based housing groups in an attempt to bridge the gap between medium-term supported accommodation and permanent independent housing. 18.39 Mainstream public housing stock is leased to a sponsoring group (which usually provides accommodation services and is SAAP-funded), which establishes and supports shared households of young people who are in need of initial and relatively minimal levels of support. Once the young people attain the capacity to live independently (usually within three months), the lease of the property is transferred from the sponsoring organisation directly to the young people. To mid 1988 the total number of young people housed has been extremely small compared to the need. Only 37 youth have been assisted by a total of 18 organisations." However, 'feedback from [the] participating organisations about the efficacy of the scheme is encouraging '.39 The Head Lease Transfer Scheme is a useful initiative in preparing some young people to move away from one form of supported accommodation — by gradually removing the support system but leaving them in the same accommodation. We emphasise, however, that it alone is not adequate for many homeless children and young people who are particularly disadvantaged or have been damaged by their experiences and need various kinds of support. Wombat Youth Accommodation Services Group Inc. (Victoria) 18.40 A scheme which is in some ways similar, but which is more intensive in the support it offers, operates in Victoria. Wombat Youth Accommodation houses young people in a number of dwellings — some of which have been provided under the Victorian Ministry of Housing and Construction's Youth Housing Program, some through the Crisis Accommodation Program, some by the Melbourne City Council, and some are private rental properties. The objective is to provide support to the households established. Wombat finds that `most young people housed by Wombat have had limited family support, have learnt few or no living skills and have not had families they can discuss important issues with, for example, drugs, sex, etc.'4° Consequently, Wombat workers are dealing with a group of young people for whom housing is only one of a multitude of problems. It is necessary, therefore, for workers to assist individual residents with problems such as income support, employment, family issues, sexuality and legal questions. Despite the lack of resources, some camps and recreational and cultural activities are undertaken and a Health and Nutrition project is run by the organisation. Considerable time and effort is also devoted to working with residents on communication issues in an attempt to minimise disputes within households and between households and neighbours. 18.41 The rent paid by tenants is based on a varying percentage of income, starting at 0% for those with no income and moving to 10% for $50 per week and 15% for $100 per week.4' During 1987, Wombat received 222 appropriate referrals for its houses (an increase of 120% over 1986 figures) but was able to accommodate only 58 (26%) of those young people.42 18.42 Apart from providing housing and supporting tenants households, the Wombat group also sees it as essential to be involved in broader youth housing issues (such as providing a general housing assistance and referral service to young people unable to be housed by Wombat) and attempting to contribute to change through involvement in community consultations.43 Wombat provides information and practical assistance to a large number of young people seeking independent accommodation on the private rental market through a shop front office. The office can also directly assist with rental payments and offers relocation assistance. ACCOMMODATION PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS 18.43 As discussed in Chapter 15, Youth Supported Accommodation Program, there are very few accommodation options for young people with behavioural problems or who have been offenders. Two programs which do cater for such young people are `RAFT' operated by Barnardo's Australia in Canberra and 'INC' operated by the South Australian Department for Community Welfare. The Inquiry also received evidence about a residential program for young drug and alcohol abusers: `Rileys' in Sydney. Residential Alternatives for Teenagers (A.C.T.) 18.44 Barnardo's Australia operates a program in Canberra, the Residential Alternatives for Teenagers (RAFT), which was established in 1986. The need for the RAFT program was identified when it was found that Barnard° House, which is a refuge for homeless young people, was being increasingly used to accommodate young people from disturbed backgrounds or who were offenders. As the refuge was not appropriate for young homeless people with severe behavioural problems, Barnardo's initiated a community placement program which caters for ten young people. 18.45 RAFT is a medium to long-term community placement scheme with placements on average for 12 months, with some extending much longer. A part-time worker with the program described RAFT as follows: The normal situation in our program is that we place a young person in a home and we do a fast growing up process. The theory is that given some very strict guidelines and some security, they can often go through the process which many young people take ten years to go through. We will have put them through that process in six months by having started off with a fairly strict set-up, then gradually widening the boundaries of their behaviour and working towards independence...That involves helping with independence skills and basic house caring, budgeting, cooking, etc. We are working under the assumption that these people will go into an independent living situation when they leave us."
[We have] a 14-year-old girl who, before she came to us, was in a number of refuges and.. .she hail had a very unsettled time of changing her residence every three months — to the point where when she got into Bamardo House there were two suicide attempts and she was not attending school. She was placed with a family earlier this year and is now attending school and has this week presented us with a school report full of — I think four A's out of seven subjects. That is totally unbelievable when you consider the kid that came into the program six months ago." 18.47 The ten households which accept placements of homeless young children from the RAFT program are paid $110 per week for what is essentially a 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week responsibility. These household carers are trained by Bamardo's and participate in ongoing monthly training meetings, with fortnightly supervision from a social worker and psychologist from Barnardo's. The Barnardo's workers carefully monitor contact with the homeless young person's family and if possible work towards returning the young person to his or her home. Originally the RAFT program used traditional families — two parent families — as carers. They are now attempting to extend the program to include three new carers who are single parents. As noted in evidence to the Inquiry by the worker at RAFT: This is very labour intensive work. Unless we are only to put bandaids on problems, we have to meet individual needs -- we have to put a heck of a lot of time and energy into each individual we come across." Intensive Neighbourhood Care Scheme (South Australia) 18.48 The Intensive Neighbourhood Care Scheme (INC) is a community placement scheme operated by the Department of Community Services in South Australia. The scheme began in 1979 and provides temporary care for adolescents in crisis who cannot live at home. INC was originally devised as an alternative to secure (institutional) care for young offenders and has now expanded into a program which also caters for other young people with severe behavioural, emotional and social problems. It aims at reducing re-offending, keeping the child out of institutions, preventing harmful peer group contact but maintaining close ties with the child's family and improving the child's behaviour, self-image and attitude to society'.' Participants are placed in family homes in the community. Families selected are trained and paid by the Department with the aim of providing a supportive family environment and individual attention to each participant, allowing them to maintain some normality in their otherwise often disrupted lifestyle.48 18.49 INC is viewed by the Department as part of a wider program of deinstitutionalisation and normalisation. Five operating principles have been articulated. These are:
18.50 Children and young people eligible for placement under the INC Scheme must fall into one of the following categories:
18.51 The program has 80 families State-wide who have been specifically recruited and trained to look after eligible children within their households. In 1987 they included eight Aboriginal families for the placement of Aboriginal children. The INC program made 429 placements during 1987 and, significantly, has recently experienced a significant rise in referrals of young people deemed to be 'at risk'. These young people are usually the victims of child abuse. Rileys Inner City Youth Advocacy Service (NSW) 18.52 Evidence to the Inquiry in all States clearly indicated that young homeless people with drug and alcohol problems are particularly badly catered for by refuges and such supported accommodation programs as exist. Youth refuges generally reject such young people and residential detoxification programs are most often designed for adults (and many will not accept adolescents). In Sydney an innovative residential therapeutic program specifically for young drug and alcohol abusers aged 12 to 18 years was closed down during 1988 by withdrawal of its funding. 18.53 Rileys' aim was to provide an: ...accommodation service [encompassing] emergency accommodation, counselling, support, referral and follow up to young people with drug problems as existing services cannot meet their specific needs.9) These 'specific needs' related not only to substance abuse and related behaviour but also to the backgrounds of Rileys' clients. All of the residents had a history of chronic family instability and emotional and physical violence; 90% of the young women residents and 75% of the young men said they had been victims of sexual abuse.5 When these factors are understood in a context of the young age of this group, it is clear that a specifically targeted treatment model is required. 18.54 After some experimentation, Rileys established a two-stage residential program which was described as follows: House 1 aims to assess and stabilise the residents in order to achieve enough awareness and control on their behaviour to make real choices as to their lifestyle, personal goals and social ambitions. It is a period of withdrawal from drugs, from the street/family scene, and from the community. The programme is structured and the residents are expected to participate actively, both individually and in groups.
|