Aboriginal Family Planning Circle evaluation: Empowering Aboriginal communities in evaluating and future-proofing Aboriginal-led community programmes

Abstract

The Aboriginal Family Planning Circle (AFPC) programme is an Aboriginal-led community programme, which works with Aboriginal families in Western Sydney to address their complex needs and reduce the risk of having their children put into out-of-home care (OOHC). This article explores two external evaluations undertaken by WESTIR Limited (WESTIR), a non-Aboriginal research service, on the AFPC programme. The purpose of the first evaluation was to provide an assessment of how effective the AFPC programme had been for participants and identify programme aspects that could be improved or developed. The second evaluation was undertaken to examine whether the AFPC programme had continued to meet its objectives and address some knowledge gaps, particularly the estimated savings and return on investment that the programme created for the OOHC system in New South Wales (NSW). The evaluations used qualitative and quantitative techniques, including interviews, focus groups and a return on investment analysis. This article outlines methods, results and recommendations from both evaluations, along with lessons learned to better inform evaluation practice. This case study shows that culturally responsive evaluations can provide an avenue for Aboriginal communities to advocate for the continued funding of their programmes. It also emphasises the need to adequately resource Aboriginal programme evaluations in the community services sector now and in the future.

Keywords

Aboriginal community programme evaluation family planning out-of-home care

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AbSec. (2019). Out-of-home care and child removals. https://www.absec.org.au/out-of-home-care.html

Blignault

Williams

(2017). Challenges in evaluating Aboriginal healing programs: Definitions, diversity and data. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 17, 4–10.

Connolly

(2004). A perspective on the origins of family group conferencing [FGDM issues in brief]. American Humane.

Hood

Hopson

R. K.

Kirkhart

K. E.

(2015). Culturally responsive evaluation: Theory, practice and future implications. In Newcomer

K. E.

Hatry

H. P.

Wholey

J. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 281–318). John Wiley.

Hurworth

Harvey

(2012). Indigenous evaluation: An editorial review. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 12(1), 2–5.

Markiewicz

(2012). Closing the gap through respect, relevance, reciprocity and responsibility: Issues in the evaluation of programs for Indigenous communities in Australia. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 12(1), 19–25.

McCausland

(2019). ‘I’m sorry but I can’t take a photo of someone’s capacity being built’: Reflections on evaluation of Indigenous policy and programmes. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 19(2), 64–78.

McFarlane

(2016). The single biggest reform to child welfare’ is a re-run of decade old promises. https://theconversation.com/the-single-biggest-reform-to-child-welfare-is-a-re-run-of-decade-old-promises-68822

Morley

(2015). What works in effective Indigenous community-managed programs and organisations. Child Family Community Australia.

10.

Muir

Dean

(2017). Evaluating the outcomes of programs for Indigenous families and communities. Child Family Community Australia.

11.

NSW Department of Family and Community Services. (2019). Family group conferencing. www.facs.nsw.gov.au/families/out-of-home-care/parents-with-kids-in-oohc/caseworker/chapters/family-group-conferencing

12.

NSW Government. (2016). Their futures matter: A new approach – Reform directions from the independent review of out of home care in New South Wales.

13.

NSW Government. (2018a). Targeted earlier intervention program outcomes framework.

14.

NSW Government. (2018b). Their futures matter: Working together to improve outcomes for children, young people and families [Progress report].

15.

Price

McCoy

Safi

(2012). Progressing the dialogue about a framework for Aboriginal evaluations: Sharing methods and key learnings. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 12(1), 32–37.

16.

Productivity Commission. (2017). Report on government services 2017 – Chapter 16. Child protection services.

17.

Productivity Commission. (2019). Report on government services 2019 – Chapter 16. Child protection services.

18.

Rogers

Radcliffe

Babyack

Layton

(2018). Demonstrating the value of community development: An inclusive evaluation capacity building approach in a non-profit Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisation. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 18(4), 234–255.

19.

Rossingh

Yunupingu

(2016). Evaluating as an outsider or an insider: A two-way approach guided by the knowers of culture. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 16(3), 5–14.

20.

Scougall

(2006). Reconciling tensions between principles and practice in Indigenous evaluation. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 6, 49–55.

21.

Sutton

Baxter

Grey

Putt

(2016). Working both-ways: Using participatory and standardised methodologies with Indigenous Australians in a study of remote community safety and wellbeing. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 16(4), 30–40.

22.

Williams

(2018). Ngaa-bi-nya Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander program evaluation framework. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 18(1), 6–20.