Is headspace making a difference to young people’s lives?

Recommendations

Info

Appendix C same time at baseline, and that the follow up would be approximately 9 months later for all three surveys. However, this was not possible to achieve. The difference in timing of the surveys has been taken into account in the outcomes and cost-effectiveness analysis as outlined below. Survey of headspace clients The aim of the longitudinal survey of headspace clients (the intervention group) is to collect information about young people who have accessed headspace services and how these services may have impacted upon their mental health and other relevant outcomes. An initial sample of 1,500 headspace clients was targeted. The survey collection has achieved a first wave sample of 1,582 young people. Two separate data collection processes were initiated for the Wave 1 data collection. The first data collection conducted by Colmar-Brunton resulted in insufficient response rates for the sample. Following joint efforts by headspace and SPRC to promote survey participation, SPRC launched another data collection round, which resulted in a sufficient Wave 1 sample being collected. The evaluators conducted analysis on the headspace clients who participated in the survey to determine their representativeness in comparison to the broader headspace client population. This analysis is presented below. Representativeness of headspace intervention group The objective of this analysis is to assess the representativeness of the headspace survey intervention group over the population of all headspace clients observed within the 2013/14 hCSA dataset. The representativeness of the survey group is important so that the results can be generalised to the overall population. headspace survey participants were matched to the hCSA data and a number of characteristics were assessed and compared. These included demographic and geographical variables, service use and mental health issues and treatment. As the headspace survey intervention group was separated into two data collection cohorts, both groups have been assessed separately and are labelled - intervention group 1 and 2 respectively. Demographic variables We find that individuals are relatively uniformly represented across different ages in the intervention group and the entire population, however the intervention group is more likely to be older than young people in the hCSA data Figure C1). Figure C1 Age distribution – hCSA and intervention survey group Source: Authors calculations from headspace intervention survey data and hCSA data. Social Policy Research Centre 2015 headspace Evaluation Final Report 170
Appendix C Regarding gender, in both groups males are relatively under-represented (with a magnitude of around 10 percentage points) relative to females in the intervention group compared to the entire population. Figure C2 Sex distribution – hCSA and intervention survey group Source: Authors calculations from headspace intervention survey data and hCSA data. Conversely, native-born Australians, those from native-English speaking as well as from non- Indigenous background are relatively over-represented in the headspace survey intervention group compared to the entire population (results not shown). The distribution of individuals across states is relatively uniform in the intervention group and the entire population as is, to an extent, the degree of disadvantage of the localities where the individuals come from, as captured by SEIFA scores. However, those in the intervention group have a higher representation in major city residential origin group, and a lower representation in outer regional group, compared to the entire population. Mental health measures Mental health and behaviour are recorded as the primary presenting issue at first visit for the majority of clients in headspace intervention groups and in the population as a whole (Figure C3). Just over 80% of those in both intervention groups and around 72% in the entire population present with mental health and behaviour issues at their first visit. Figure C3 Primary issues at first visit Source: Authors calculations from headspace intervention survey data and hCSA data. Social Policy Research Centre 2015 headspace Evaluation Final Report 171
Page 1 and 2:
Is headspace making a difference to
Page 3 and 4:
Authors This report was written by
Page 5 and 6:
5. Service Delivery Model 73 5.1 Wh
Page 7 and 8:
Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Main
Page 9 and 10:
Figure 4.9 Figure 4.10 Figure 4.11
Page 11 and 12:
Executive Summary headspace 1 aims
Page 13 and 14:
Executive Summary or very high leve
Page 15 and 16:
Executive Summary through mental he
Page 17 and 18:
value to society of the improvement
Page 19 and 20:
1. Introduction people in Australia
Page 21 and 22:
2. Evaluation Methodology 2.1 Aims
Page 23 and 24:
2. Evaluation Methodology Evaluatio
Page 25 and 26:
2. Evaluation Methodology Table 2.3
Page 27 and 28:
2. Evaluation Methodology Represent
Page 29 and 30:
3. Access and Engagement with Centr
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Th
Page 53 and 54:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients 35
Page 55 and 56:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Ch
Page 57 and 58:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients No
Page 59 and 60:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Th
Page 61 and 62:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Fi
Page 63 and 64:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients A
Page 65 and 66:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Ta
Page 67 and 68:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients nu
Page 69 and 70:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients No
Page 71 and 72:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Ta
Page 73 and 74:
y three percentage points, and 2.1
Page 75 and 76:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients So
Page 77 and 78:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients I
Page 79 and 80:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients in
Page 81 and 82:
4. Outcomes of headspace Clients Wh
Page 83 and 84:
5. Service Delivery Model For the a
Page 85 and 86:
5. Service Delivery Model the provi
Page 87 and 88:
5. Service Delivery Model headspace
Page 89 and 90:
5. Service Delivery Model services,
Page 91 and 92:
5. Service Delivery Model services
Page 93 and 94:
5. Service Delivery Model Further,
Page 95 and 96:
5. Service Delivery Model that we
Page 97 and 98:
5. Service Delivery Model is a cons
Page 99 and 100:
5. Service Delivery Model connectio
Page 101 and 102:
5. Service Delivery Model Table 5.2
Page 103 and 104:
5. Service Delivery Model Table 5.3
Page 105 and 106:
5. Service Delivery Model I don’t
Page 107 and 108:
5. Service Delivery Model group is
Page 109 and 110:
5. Service Delivery Model Figure 5.
Page 111 and 112:
6. The Costs of headspace One of th
Page 113 and 114:
6. The Costs of headspace Table 6.1
Page 115 and 116:
6. The Costs of headspace In-scope
Page 117 and 118:
6. The Costs of headspace Revenue/
Page 119 and 120:
6. The Costs of headspace Other gov
Page 121 and 122:
7. Conclusion The evaluation of hea
Page 123 and 124:
7. Conclusion treatment); however,
Page 125 and 126:
7. Conclusion Overall the evaluatio
Page 127 and 128:
Appendix A Evaluation scope areas h
Page 129 and 130: Appendix B The current model of hea
Page 131 and 132: Appendix B and each SA3 in non-capi
Page 133 and 134: Appendix B chapter 39 . To determin
Page 135 and 136: Appendix B While there is an overal
Page 137 and 138: Appendix B Figure B3 describes the
Page 139 and 140: Appendix B Figure B5 Cost per young
Page 141 and 142: Appendix B The concept of access as
Page 143 and 144: Appendix B Figure B7 Heard of heads
Page 145 and 146: Figure B10 Proportion of headspace
Page 147 and 148: Appendix B Table B5 Females 18-25 y
Page 149 and 150: Appendix B following section. Figur
Page 151 and 152: Appendix B and less access to mains
Page 153 and 154: Appendix B Figure B17 Estimated pre
Page 155 and 156: Appendix B Figure B18 SA1s within 1
Page 157 and 158: Figure B20 Hypothetical allocation
Page 159 and 160: Appendix B The current model of cen
Page 161 and 162: Appendix B Current centre funding m
Page 163 and 164: Appendix B Evaluation of the curren
Page 165 and 166: Appendix B Level of funding availab
Page 167 and 168: Appendix B provide a method for ide
Page 169 and 170: Appendix B centres and Localities i
Page 171 and 172: Appendix B for greater flexibility
Page 173 and 174: Appendix B Additional consideration
Page 175 and 176: Appendix B of achieving more effici
Page 177 and 178: Appendix B • Used the simulation
Page 179: Appendix C information relating to
Page 183 and 184: Appendix C Figure C5 Total number o
Page 185 and 186: Appendix C Table C1 Information Sum
Page 187 and 188: Appendix C Data Cleaning and Analys
Page 189 and 190: Appendix C groups. The age and sex
Page 191 and 192: Appendix C Figure C8 Demographic ch
Page 193 and 194: Appendix C The KeySurvey software s
Page 195 and 196: Appendix C different client groups.
Page 197 and 198: Appendix D Round State Centre Name
Page 199 and 200: Appendix E Characteristics HS clien
Page 201 and 202: Table E4 Cell Sizes for Figure 3.4
Page 203 and 204: Appendix F Figure F1 Changes in K10
Page 205 and 206: Appendix F three SEIFA quintiles. A
Page 207 and 208: Appendix F Occasion of service inte
Page 209 and 210: Appendix F Table F1 Cell sizes for
Page 215 and 216: Appendix G Supplementary material f
Page 217 and 218: Appendix G Table G3 Round 3 (10 cen
Page 219 and 220: Appendix G Table G7 Round 7 (10 cen
Page 221 and 222: State (youth population) a headspac
Page 223 and 224: State (youth population) a headspac
Page 225 and 226: Appendix G Table G12 Round 11(16 ce
Page 227 and 228: Table G16 Additional youth populati
Page 229 and 230: Round Region State Additional youth
Page 231 and 232:
State (youth population) a headspac
Page 233 and 234:
State (youth population) a headspac
Page 235 and 236:
Appendix G Figure G1 Percentage of
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Appendix G Table G22 Australians 18
Page 245 and 246:
Appendix G Synthetic small area est
Page 247 and 248:
Appendix G Figure G16 Estimated pre
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Appendix G Figure G22 SA1s within 1
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Appendix G Table G25 Centres alloca
Page 261 and 262:
References Atkins, D.C., Bedics, J.
Page 263:
References Smith, E., Jones, T., Wa
show all

Is headspace making a difference to young people’s lives?

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?