Directory of Commonwealth Government evaluations, audits and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010 Funding for Community Development Employment Projects ceased in urban and major regional areas with strong employment opportunities. In these locations, instead of CDEP, expanded Structured Training and Employment Projects brokerage services operate in addition to the range of mainstream employment and business support programs available to all Australians. In areas where CDEP continues, CDEP service providers that place participants into jobs are rewarded with a 26 week Community Employment Project Placement Initiative (CDEPPI) payment of $850 per outcome. In addition, the allowable limits for CDEP participants have been lowered to increase the incentive for participants to move into jobs. The number of off-CDEP employment placements achieved by CDEP service providers has markedly increased over the last three financial years, from 1575 in 2004–05 to 3074 in 2005–06 (first year of new policy directions). In the 2006–07 financial year, 5770 off-CDEP employment placements were recorded, a 56% increase over the preceding year. Another policy direction was to reduce the proportion of non-Indigenous participants in the CDEP program. CDEP service providers have successfully decreased the proportion of non-Indigenous participants from seven per cent at the end of 2004–05 to two per cent at the end of 2006–07. This exceeded the PBS target of three per cent. Post-Implementation Review - Removal of Phase 1 Remote Area Exemptions Year: 2006 Evaluator: Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination and Centrelink Terms of Reference The purpose of the Post Implementation Review (PIR) is to examine the removal of Remote Area Exemptions (RAEs) in Phase 1 communities, including: the effectiveness of implementation models used the strengths and weaknesses of each model to identify any issues/problems to identify examples of best practice which have arisen during implementation. Participation exemptions had been removed from 549 individuals in seven remote communities. The Post-Implementation Review showed that social and community impacts were mostly positive and there was no evidence of negative impacts of compliance, nor major movements between communities as a result of the removal of the Remote Areas Exemptions (RAEs). While initial implementation was slow, a focused effort looking at further ways in which to facilitate the removal of RAEs saw the progress speed up significantly. Overall, implementation seems to work best in a whole of government environment that extends to local arrangements and well-functioning relationships between all agencies are important. Findings The removal of RAEs is a highly resource intensive initiative given the nature of communicating through community consultations, the distances travelled to get to communities throughout implementation, access to communities being difficult for a range of reasons, and the need to build the capacity of service providers to engage income support recipients in ongoing activities the consultation/engagement process is very important offering a range or complex participation options made the removal of RAEs less effective Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 28 June 2010
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010 a number of related issues - including IT systems, accommodation of cultural and sorry business, mobility policy, and accuracy of payment/exemption types - need to be addressed activities need to be structured within mainstream programs that have existing public liability and personal accident coverage for participants. Office of Evaluation and Audit (OEA) audits of Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) Year: 2006 The Office of Evaluation and Audit also conducted two CDEP audits during 2006. Audit of CDEP organisations – finalised September 2006 Performance audit of CDEP performance information – in final draft stage Summaries of these should be sought from the Office of Evaluation and Audit Evaluation of Australians Working Together Year: 2005 Evaluator: Department of Employment Workplace Relations Website: http://www.workplace.gov.au/workplace/Publications/ProgrammeEvaluation/AustraliansWorkingToget her-ReportNovember2005.htm Terms of Reference The Government announced the Australians Working Together (AWT) package in the 2001-02 Commonwealth Budget. The package had the following overarching objectives: increasing self- reliance through economic participation (principally through paid employment) and social participation (which can assist transition to economic participation) generating opportunities and supporting economic and social participation through governments, communities and businesses working together building a social safety net that is more responsive to individual circumstances. The purpose of the evaluation of Australians Working Together was to assess, as far as possible, whether the package of measures and initiatives was effective in meeting its objectives of increasing participation and decreasing income support reliance among working age income support recipients. Four key target groups were identified in the evaluation: Indigenous Australians; mature age job seekers; parents with children; and people with disabilities. Findings Evaluation reports are available on the website. The Australians Working Together Report, October 2005 showed that the initiative was an important first step towards increasing participation of the working age income support population and highlighted the potential gains that could be achieved by new participation requirements. It also pointed to the benefits of establishing closer links between Indigenous job seekers and mainstream non-Indigenous employment services. The report shows that gains could be made in reducing Indigenous unemployment by encouraging Indigenous job seekers to participate more fully in the job market. The positive response to the AWT initiative among Indigenous communities helped set the scene for the Government’s reforms to the Community Development and Employment Projects (CDEP) program, which were introduced in early 2005, along with other reform measures. Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 29 June 2010
Page 1 and 2: Directory of Commonwealth Governmen
Page 3 and 4: Directory of Indigenous and related
Page 9 and 10: Introduction Directory of Indigenou
Page 15 and 16: Terms of Reference Directory of Ind
Page 19 and 20: Findings Directory of Indigenous an
Page 29 and 30: Effectiveness Efficiency Di
Page 35: Terms of Reference: Directory of In
Page 49 and 50: Funding from the IPA program is pro
Page 61 and 62: Key Findings Directory of Indigenou
Page 75 and 76: Terms of Reference Directory of Ind
Page 85 and 86: Findings addressing issues affectin
Page 87 and 88:
Directory of Indigenous and related
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Key deliverables are: Directory of
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Home Ownership on Indigenous Land Y
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Review of Communities in Crisis Yea
Page 111 and 112:
Areas for investigation included:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Findings Directory of Indigenous an
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
show all

Directory of Commonwealth Government evaluations, audits and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?