Department of Health and Human Services

HOUSING DISABILITY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

DHHSOutcomes Framework

Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation Services

Explaining the Outcomes Hierarchy / The DHHS Outcomes Framework establishes a hierarchy of outcomes by adopting the methodology of Results Based Accountability.
At the top are the Population Outcomes – these are the intended long term changes to the Tasmanian community that the funded program or service will contribute towards improving.
The next level of the hierarchy is the Program Outcomes – these are the target outcomes specific to the funded service provider. These program outcomes are categorised into three domains to measure performance:
  • Change – is anyone better off?
  • Intermediate – how well did we do it?
  • Outputs – how much did we do?
Joining this altogether is a Theory of Change that provides a set of assumptions used to explain all the steps expected from the specific program or service that links what the service will do with the outcomes it will achieve.
Explaining the Performance Measures / Performance indicators measure the achievement of program outcomes, by showing how well a funded program or service is working towards its goal.
Targets are used to compare the current performance of the service against agreed expectations – such as a baseline from previous years. If the service is new and setting a baseline target is difficult, then an interim target may be established as an informed guess of what can be achieved.
Unless stated as a Default Event in the grant deed, then the performance indicators are to be used by DHHS to inform partnership discussions about the efficiency and effectiveness of delivering the service.
The impact of external factors / External factors that impact the livelihood of the Tasmanian community influence the ability of funded services to achieve the intended change for their clients.
These external factors are beyond the direct influence or control for a service, such as unemployment rates, supply of and demand for affordable housing.
Relevant external factors need to be considered when assessing the performance of a funded service.
Proxy indicators can be used to measure these external factors, and these will be integrated into the reporting framework for services. Where possible, these proxy indicators will be broken down by region. The proxy indicators for the relevant external factors include:
External Factor / Proxy Indicator / Source / Frequency
Unemployment / Unemployment rate (%)
Youth unemployment rate (%) / ABS – Labour Force (6202.0) / Monthly
Housing Stress / % Low income Tasmanians experiencing housing stress / Census (2011) / Every 5 years
Supply of Affordable Housing / # Private sector dwellings approved
# Public sector dwellings approved / ABS – Building Approvals (8731.0) / Annual
Demand for Affordable Housing / # social housing applicants as a proportion of the total social housing portfolio / PC – ROGS (DHHS) / Annual
Rental Affordability / % Low income households in rental stress
% low priced rental homes being rented to moderate and high income households / PC – ROGS (ABS)
Census
(income quintile vs. rent quintile) / Annual
Every 5 years
Homelessness / % Tasmanians experiencing homelessness / Census (2011) / Every 5 years

Clearance of V1.0

Prepared by / Carolan Hands / Program Officer / 23 November 2017
Cleared by / Jessemy Stone / Director Housing Programs / 24 November 2017
Department of Health and Human Services
HOUSING DISABILITY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

Commissioning for Outcomes Statement

Program Name: Youthat Risk Response Centre

Program Type: Under 16Youth Crisis Accommodation

Funded Organisation/s: (Organisation name to be added)

Outcomes Hierarchy

Population Outcomes

The Youth Crisis Accommodation Servicewill contribute to: /
  • Tasmanians having safe, secure and affordable housing
  • Tasmanians experiencing homelessness or risk of homelessness quickly returning to stable living circumstances

Theory of Change

It is assumed that: /
  • When affordable housing supply is not available, accessible or appropriate to the needs of an individual or family, the risk of these people experiencing housing stress, housing crisis and homelessness increases.
  • External factors such as unemployment rates and supply levels of affordable housing impact the level of housing stress or crisis a family or individual experiences, and their ability to resume housing stability following a period of stress or crisis.
  • Housing crisis and homelessness often occurs for vulnerable individuals at defined housing ‘transition points’ for example young people shifting to independence, and individuals experiencing instances of family dissolution. Vulnerable cohorts at these transition points commonly includeyoung people, people living with disability and mental illness, people exiting institutional settings, people experiencing family violence and low income households experiencing housing crisis.
  • Young people are over-represented among the homeless population in Tasmania, with 25 per cent of homeless Tasmanians aged between 12 and 24.
  • Young people are vulnerable to becoming homeless if they become disconnected from their family, and/or it is not safe for them to live at home.
  • When young people find themselves in housing crisis with nowhere safe to live, immediate accommodation and support is available through the crisis accommodation system to stabilise the crisis, restore family connections (where safe and appropriate to do so), engage with school and services, and/or seek alternative options for longer term wellbeing.
  • For young people, the crisis accommodation system can act both as a responsive intervention to support young people to return back to family and re-engage with education and community, or as a ‘safety net’ in place for situations where prevention and early intervention measures are unsuccessful.
  • It is recognised that young people under the age of 16 accessing the crisis accommodation system have distinct needs and priorities which differentiate them from older age groups. These variations are recognised and catered for within the service system through provision of a specific youth crisis shelter for young people aged between 12 and 15.
  • Generally, the age range for intake by youth crisis accommodation providers is 13-20. This wide age range can be detrimental to young people under the age of 16 whocan be exposed to and influenced by behaviours more appropriate to an older, more ‘adult’ age cohort. Where the built form supports age separation the risk is diminished, however most youth shelter cannot consistently implement an age separation model of integrated accommodation and support.
  • As developmental maturity, demand, vacancy and client mix within a service at any point in time are key considerations in addition to age, flexibility is required to ensure a service can provide a safe, supportive and appropriate environment for clients.
  • Young people under the age of 16 accessing the crisis accommodation system often have high levels of complex and layered need, due in large part to their developmental maturity and exposure to risk factors that can lead to ongoing negative health, social and economic outcomes throughout their lives.They usually fall into one of three groups:
  • young people who are temporarily disconnected from their family and home and are at risk of homelessness
  • young people who are unstably connected to their family/home and are homeless but where there is an opportunity to reunify with family
  • young people who are chronically disconnected to their family/home and are homeless and there is no realistic prospect of them being able to return safely home
  • Accommodation options for these young people exiting the crisis system are much more limited than older cohorts as their life stage (mostly family dependent, or in some cases transitioning to independence) and their specific support needs mean that independent, unsupported accommodation options are not an appropriate response.
  • As such, the youth crisis accommodation system generally requires greater flexibility in terms of timeframes and intensity of support to cater for the specific needs of this younger cohort.
  • Ease of access to Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation is paramount, with a ‘no wrong door’ policy enabling direct access or referral through Child Safety Services, Gateway, Youth Justice and other mainstream and specialist support services
  • Young people under 16 in housing crisis can access support and accommodation through Gateway Services (Family Support Services) and Child Safety Services however it is acknowledged that this option is often limited due to capacity issues in the Children and Youth Services system, hence the need for a specific crisis response for this cohort
  • Often, the crisis accommodation system acts as a ‘safety net’ when the Children and Youth Service system does not have the capacity to provide a young person with the support they require, or when a young person has disengaged from that support.
  • An effective crisis response for young people under the age of 16:
  • provides immediate support to stabilise a client’s period of crisis.
  • providesaccess to safe and appropriate accommodation
  • provides intensive support to assist the young person to rebuild relationships to allow exit into accommodation with family (where possible)
  • where accommodation with family is not achievable, the service ensures:
  • clients are supported (through referral into relevant Children and Youth Services where possible) to exit into more suitable accommodation.
  • provides adequate support to engage or re-engage with schools and services and the local community, and where appropriate makes referrals to mainstream and specialist support services
  • Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation offers a flexible, shortterm service response to cater for the individual needs of clients, recognising:
  • some clients may take longer than others to rebuild relationships to allow exit into accommodation with family
  • where accommodation with family is not achievable, clients may have difficulty accessing appropriate alternative secure accommodation
  • To cater for the ongoing demand for crisis accommodation, exit planning begins on service entry and is built on client’s capacity and aspirations. Timeliness of a client’s exit is affected by several factors, including:
  • family reunification
  • availability of appropriate accommodation client progress and level of engagement – a client may stay longer within a crisis service if they are engaging well with support and are less likely to re-present if progress is continued for a defined period of time.
  • The support component integral to crisis accommodation involves working with clients to set and plan the critical actions needed to stabilise the crisis.
  • Achievement of agreed goals requires strong client engagement, connectionwith a wide range of services and regular reviews of progress.
  • Crisis accommodation staff must have the appropriate skills, qualifications and experience to identify and respond to client needs.
  • Crisis accommodation services use the Specialist Homelessness Information System (SHIP), an integrated information technology system to make referrals and to record and share information.
  • The focus of Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation is to ensure that clients have the best opportunity to rebuild relationships to enable exit into accommodation with family, and/or support to achieve an alternative secure accommodation solution.

Program Outcomes
Change
Is anyone better off? /
  • Clients1exit into more secure housing, either by being accommodated with family, or into more secure2 housing, with the appropriate3 support in place.
  • The service is accessible and responsive to demand
1The client is the resident of the Youth at Risk Response Centre and is the presenting unit head in SHIP.
2‘Secure’ refers to tenure security, safety and affordability of accommodation – i.e. accommodation that meets the identified needs of a client.
3 ‘Appropriate’ refers to that which caters for the identified needs of a client.
Intermediate
How well did we do it? / Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodationis accessible, safe and responsive to the immediate needs of clients in order to stabilise their housing crisis and assist them to rebuild relationships and exit into accommodation with family, or where this is unlikely, prepare for exit into alternative secure accommodation.
To enable this, the Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation Service will ensure:
  • Accommodation is safe and affordable with quick vacancy turnovers
  • Clients are supportedto stabilise their crisis and, where appropriate and safe to do so, to rebuild relationships with family or carers and mainstream services to plan their exit out of crisis
  • Clients exit the service with appropriate supports in place,resulting in fewer instances of repeat homelessness
  • Clients are satisfied that the service is responsive and appropriate to their needs
  • Key partner agencies1 are satisfied that the service is responsive and appropriate to the client’s needs
1Partner agencies include organisations that predominantly share clients of the service and may include Child Safety Services, Gateway, youth Justice and other mainstream and specialist services.
Outputs
How much did we do? /
  • Clients receive under 16 youth-specific crisis supported accommodation
  • Clients are connected to mainstream services (where appropriate) to help them access the range of available services specific to their needs

Outcome Indicators

How much did we do?

/

How well did we do it?

# clients assisted
# clients connected to mainstream services / % quality and appropriateness of accommodation
% client progress
% repeat homelessness
% satisfied clients
% satisfied partner agencies

Is anyone better off?

#more securely housed
# with appropriate support in place
# unmet demand / % more securely housed
% with appropriate support in place
% unmet demand

CFOS – Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation –Version 1.0 (24 November 2017)Page1

Performance Measures

Outcome Indicator

/

Performance Indicator

/

Baseline

/

Target

/ Source

Is anyone better off?

# and % more securely housed
This is a shared outcome across supported accommodation providers; including crisis, medium term, long term supported accommodation services and Housing Support Services. / (PI 1) / Number and proportion of clients exiting the service into more secure accommodation, by
  • Client demographics
  • Presenting household circumstances
  • Presenting tenure status
  • Closing tenure status
  • Accommodated with family
  • Medium term supported accommodation
/ New / Increasing trend over time / (PI 1) SHIP – Half Yearly
# and % with appropriate support in place
This is a shared outcome across supported accommodation providers; including crisis, medium term, long term supported accommodation services and Housing Support Services. / (PI 2) / Number and proportion of clients exiting the service with the appropriate support in place, by
  • Service name of outgoing referral
  • Status of outgoing referral
/ New / Increasing trend over time / (PI 2) SHIP – Half Yearly
# and % unmet demand
This is a shared outcome across supported accommodation providers; including crisis, medium term, long term supported accommodation services and Housing Support Services. / (PI 3) / Number of unassisted persons, by
  • Reason unassisted
/ New / Decreasing trend over time / (PI 3) SHIP – Half Yearly
Outcome Indicator / Performance Indicator / Baseline / Target / Source
How well did we do it?
Tenancy management:
  • Access
/ (PI 4) / Proportion of vacancies within the service, by reason:
  • Vacant
  • Non appearance
  • Unavailable (maintenance)
  • Appropriateness
/ New / Decreasing trend over time
. / (P1 4) SHS – Half Yearly
*reporting rules provided
  • Safety
/ (PI 5) / Number of serious consumer related incidents by:
  • Type of incident
/ New / Decreasing trend over time / PI 5) DHHS – Half Yearly
*Reports collected in accordance with existing Consumer Related Serious Incident Reporting Policy for Tasmania’s DHHS Funded Community Sector.
  • Affordability
/ (PI 6) / Proportion of total income paid for service, by essential services included:
  • Rent
  • Power
  • Meals
  • Essential household items
/ New / No target – monitor affordability across service system
* Intent of this measure is visibility on affordability of client charges. Information from services will determine what the baseline for an affordable charge is for crisis accommodation. / (PI 6) SHS – Annual
*reporting rules provided
% client progress / (PI 7) / Proportion of clients assessed as making progress against client outcomes at the close of their support period, by
  • Overall progress
  • Type of outcome indicator
  • Duration of support
  • Reason support period ended
    (if applicable)
/ New / Increasing trend over time / (PI 7) SHIP – Half Yearly
*Using Outcomes Star ™for homelessness
% repeat homelessness / (PI 8) / Proportion of former clients that
re-present at the Youth at Risk Centre, by
  • Client demographics
  • Presenting household circumstances
  • Previous presenting household circumstance
  • Previous reason for ending tenancy
  • Previous Outcomes Star rating
  • Time since previous assistance
  • Duration of previous support period
  • Number of repeats
/ New
Baseline to be set in July-2020 / Decreasing trend over time / (PI 8) SHIP – Half Yearly
% satisfied clients / (PI 9) / Proportion clients that report they were satisfied that the crisis accommodation service was safe, responsive, and appropriate to their needs. / New / 75 per cent of surveyed clients reported they were satisfied with:
  • overall satisfaction
  • accessibility
  • affordability
  • adequacy
  • service Integration
  • safety
/ (PI 9) SHIP - Half Yearly
*Exit survey not compulsory
% satisfied partner agencies / (PI 10) / Proportion partner agencies that report they were satisfied that the service was responsive, referrals were accurate and timely, and the service was appropriate to the needs of the client. / New / 75 per cent of surveyed partner agencies reported they were satisfied with:
  • Service Integration
  • Responsiveness
  • Appropriateness
/ (PI 10) Housing Connect forum – Annual
*Survey to be developed
Outcome Indicator / Performance Indicator / Baseline / Target / Source
How much did we do?
# clients assisted / (PI 11) / Number of clients assisted, by
  • Client demographics
  • Presenting household circumstances
  • Duration of support within the reporting period
/ TBD / Increasing trend over time / (PI 11) SHIP – Half Yearly
# clients connected to support / (P1 12) / Number of clients connected to mainstream services where appropriate, by:
  • service type
/ New / No target - monitor breadth of referral source / (PI 12) SHIP - Half Yearly

CFOS – Under 16 Youth Crisis Accommodation – Version 1.0 (24 November 2017)Page1